HD 

4491 

Fr47M 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


MUNICIPALITIES 


.VS 


Private  Corporations 

Political  and  Business  Management 
COMPARED 

fM.    J.     prRAIMOI300 


/i|p 


MUNICIPALITIES 

VS. 

Private  Corporations.  /, 


Political  and  Business  Management 


COMPARED    BY 

M.  J.  I  FRANCISCO. 


Tables  Showing  Cost  of  Lights  Furnished  by  Private  Com- 
panies and  Municipal  Plants,  a  List  of  Municipal  Plants 
Sold  or  Abandoned,  Experience  of  Municipalities, 
Legal  and  Editorial  Opinions. 


Published  by  M.  J.  FRANCISCO  &  SON, 

RUTLAND,  VERMONT. 


1900  : 

THE   TUTTLE    COMPANY.    PRINTERS, 

RUTLAND.  VT. 


PREFACE. 


The  author  commenced  the  investigation  and  study 
of  municipal  ownership  in  1885.  Twelve  years'  practi- 
cal experience  in  electric  lighting  enables  him  to  anal- 
ize  statements  and  reports  of  electric  plants. 

He  sold  his  plant  and  withdrew  from  the  business 
three  years  ago. 

This,  and  all  other  books  published  by  the  author, 
have  been  at  his  own  expense,  without  the  knowledge, 
aid  or  money  from  any  party  or  corporation ;  is  not  now, 
and  never  has  been,  the  attorney  for,  or  employed  as  such, 
by  any  corporation  or  electric  light  company. 

While  manager  of  the  local  electric  light  company, 
was  elected  president  of  the  National  Electric  Light 
Association  of  the  United  States,  which  enabled  him  to 
secure  valuable  information  regarding  electric  lighting, 
but  is  not  now  a  member  of  that  association. 

The  object  of  this  book  is  to  furnish  reliable  facts  in 
relation  to  private  and  municipal  plants. 

The  reports,  regarding  municipal  plants  given  in 
this  work,  are  made  from  city  records  signed  by  a  respon- 
sible official. 

In  every  case  where  positive  and  reliable  information 
could  not  be  procured,  the  report  of  that  city  has  been 
omitted. 


Copyrighted,  1900,  by 
M.  J.  Fkancisco. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  AN  ADDRESS  DELIVERED 
BY  M.  J.  FRANCISCO,  BEFORE  THE 
LEAGUE  OF  AMERICAN  MUNICIPALI- 
TIES. 

•^  The  functions  of  a  municipality  are  to  govern  and 
regulate.  It  is  a  well-established  axiom  that  to  govern 
successfully  requires  that  one  shall  be  wholly  disinter- 
ested, while  ownership  implies  the  greatest  self  interest. 

Therefore,  we  have  two  propositions  that  are  directly 
antagonistic.  The  experience  of  years  has  demonstrated 
that  at  the  present  time  all  business  enterorises  require 
rare  ability  and  experience, Cif  not  genius]  to  succeed. 
Great  financiers  and  successful  men  have  devoted  their 
lives  to  the  study  and  practice  of  their  trade  or  profession. 
How  is  it  possible  then  for  municipalities  to  expect  such 
qualifications  from  officials  whose  term  of  office  is  for  one 
or  two  years  ? 

Permitting  a  municipality  to  engage  in  speculative 
ventures,  or  commercial  industries,  involves  a  most  serious 
question,  reversing  the  policy  that  has  governed  cities  for 
hundreds  of  years,  allowing  them  to  assume  all  the  hazards, 
risks  and  liabilities  that  attend  the  investment  of  money 
in  business  enterprises. 

In  doing  this,  the  city  abandons  its  governing  power 
for  which  the  municipality  was  created,  and  becomes  a 
speculator  and  a  competitor  for  gain,  and  if  it  is  eiectric 
Hgiitrcrg,  in  case  of  a  profit,  those  who  use  and  pay  for  its 
^'  -ppodttetie-n  are  taxed  for  the  benefit  of  those  who  do  not, 
while  in  the  case  of  a  loss  all  parties  owning  property  are 
--^taxed  for  the  benefit  of  users  of  electric-light. 

Judge  Dillon  says:  "The  legislature  should  be 
prohibited  from  allowing  municipal  corporations  to  engage 
in  extra  municipal  projects,  or  to  incur  debts  or  levy  taxes 

3 

1521871 


for  such  purposes.  To  clothe  them  with  powers  to  ac- 
complish purposes,  which  can  better  be  left  to  private 
enterprise,  is  unwise.  Their  chief  function  should  be  to 
regulate  and  govern.  To  invest  them  with  the  powers  of 
individuals  or  private  corporations,  for  objects  not  per- 
taining to  municipal  rule,  is  to  pervert  the  institution 
from  its  legitimate  ends,  and  to  require  of  it  duties  it  is 
not  9,dapted   satisfactorily  to  execute." 

If  the  municipality  should  assume  these  powers,  they 
could  absorb  all  business  and  manufacturing,  sell  all 
.goods,  and  control  every  branch  of  trade.  This  AVould 
destroy  competition,  stop  all  development,  and  make  the 
restless  masses  helpless  and  dependent  upon  the  munici- 
pality ;   mere  serfs,  in  fact. 

Imagine,  for  a  moment,  the  condition  of  the  United 
States  if  all  municipalities  were  to  adopt  this  system, 
with  the  well-known  working  plan  of  American  politics, 
based  upon  the  familiar  saying,  ' '  to  the  victor  belongs 
the  spoils."  and  these  spoils  available  when  either  party 
is  victorious.  We  should  have  all  industries  placed  in 
charge  of  incompetent  political  tools,  and,  as  Prof.  Whit- 
ney says,  "every  new  position  placed  at  the  disposal  of 
the  city  officials  tightens  the  grip  of  the  ring  boss  upon 
the  treasury  of  the  city." 

The  management  of  |hese  inexperienced  politicians 
would  be  so  unwieldly  that  there  could  be  no  accounta- 
bility, no  economy,  and  the  city  would  become  an  instru- 
ment of  oppression,  which  would  eventually  result  in 
anarchy.  It  is  fear  of  such  an  army  of  office-holders  that 
causes  conservative  men  to  look  with  undisguised  dread 
upon  the  paternal  tendency  of  municipalities,  for  the 
trend  is  toward  socialism,  and  they  know  that  there  is 
reason  for  caution. 

We  are  told  that  competition  is  a  failure.  Then  why 
not  have  regulation  by  law?  It  is  and  can  be  successful, 
and  the  experience  of  cities  and  states  proves  that  this  is 
the  true  remedy,  and   not  municipal    ownership.      Massa- 


chusetts  has  a  commission  to  control  and  regulate  busi- 
ness and  prices  charged,  stipulate  the  amount  of  stock  and 
bonds  that  may  be  issued,  control  all  competition.  If  any 
taxpayer  or  municipality  feels  aggrieved  by  the  acts  of 
the  private  corporation  or  prices  charged,  they  can  at 
once  apply  to  this  commission  for  relief,  which  is  seldom 
refused. 

By  this  system  of  regulation  and  control,  the  interest 
of  the  public  is  protected,  and  at  the  same  time  the  in- 
vestment of  private  capital  is  encouraged  and  fostered. 

It  is  claimed  that  municipalities  have  operated  water 
works  successfully.     Then  why  not  electric  lights? 

There  is  no  analogy  between  the  two.  Nature  fur- 
nishes the  water  free,  and  all  that  is  necessary  is  to  conduct 
it  to  the  place  where  it  is  to  be  used.  The  apparatus  re- 
quired is  simple  and  plain,  not  liable  to  accidents,  has  been 
in  use  for  a  generation,  and  will  be  used  for  a  generation  to 
come.  There  is  no  manufacture,  it  is  simply  the  distri- 
bution of  a  natural  product,  while  the  outfit  for  an  electric 
light  plant  and  the  manufacture  of  electricity  requires  the 
most  intricate  and  complex  machinery  known  to  man,  and 
is  changing  and  being  improved  constantly.  This  deli- 
cate apparatus  is  subject  to  accidents  of  all  kinds,  and  a 
heavy  loss  in  transmission.  One  flash  of  lightning  may 
wipe  out  thousands  of  dollars  in  value,  or  an  accident 
similar  to  the  one  that  occurred  in  the  station  where  a 
crane  was  being  moved,  and  the  hook,  slipping  from  the 
attendant's  hand,  struck  a  generator,  and  not  only  de- 
stroyed it,  but  the  station,  as  well  as  the  lives 
of  several  employes,  involving  a  loss  requiring  an  outlay 
of  many  thousand  dollars ;  apparatus,  where  a  careless 
movement  of  a  plug  upon  the  switch  board  would  cause  a 
short  circuit,  the  effect  of  which  no  one,  unless  they  have 
witnessed  the  action  of  a  3000-volt  current  under  such 
conditions,  can  realize ;  a  business  requiring  the  most 
faithful   men,    who  have   by  years  of   experience  proved 


their  ability,    and  who  therefore   can  command  a  salary- 
commensurate  with  the  responsibility  they  assume. 

With  such  obstacles  to  contend  with,  how  can  we  ex- 
pect success  in  a  city  plant  operated  by  inexperienced 
men,  with  constant  jealousy  and  bickering  between  the 
managers,  who  are  members  of  council  made  up  from 
politicians  of  opposing  political  parties  ? 

Hon.  Charles  Waring  said  "  that  he  favored  the  pur- 
chase of  street  railways  in  Great  Britain,  but  that  in  the 
United  States  it  would  be  utterly  out  of  the  question,  on 
account  of  the  attendant  political  evils." 

The  restless,  tireless  brain  of  the  inventor  may 
evolve  apparatus  in  the  next  few  years  that  will  revolu- 
tionize the  business,  and  the  machines  in  use  at  the  pres- 
ent time  will  become  worthless,  not  because  they  are 
worn  out,  but  by  reason  of  the  new  invention  which  can 
produce  the  light  at  so  much  less  expense  that  it  would 
necessitate  scrapping  the  present  outfit  and  purchasing 
the  new  style. 

Private  companies  have  already  had  this  experience 
in  the  past,  and  doubtless  will  suffer  in  the  same  way  in 
the  future.  Why  then  is  not  a  municipality  liable  to  the 
same  loss  if  it  embarks  in  the  business  ?  It  is  expected 
that  a  great  revolution  in  the  methods  of  generating  elec- 
tricity will  be  adopted  in  the  near  future,  and  the  plan  is 
being  agitated  of  generating  it  directly  from  coal,  thus 
avoiding  the  expense  of  steam  and  its  attendant  machin- 
ery. If  this  plan  succeeds,  the  hundreds-  of  thousands 
of  dollars  that  municipalities  have,  and  may  invest  in  the 
present  style  of  machines,  will  be  relegated  to  the  scrap 
pile.    ■ 

Electrical  invention  is  in  its  infancy.  When  it  has 
attained  its  full  growth,  mankind  will  look  back  with 
wonder  at  the  ignorance  displayed  by  the  people  of  the 
present  generation. 

The  public  have  been  deceived  in  reference  to  the 
cost  of  lights  when  furnished  by  the   municipality.     Mu- 

6 


nicipal  accounts  are  so  kept  that  in  many  cases  it  is  im- 
possible for  the  authorities  themselves  to  ascertain  the 
cost,  and  the  persons  in  charge  have  a  direct  personal  in- 
terest in  making  a  favorable  showing.  The  objection 
made  by  taxpayers,  who  oppose  municipal  ownership  of 
business  enterprises,  is  a  strong  inducement  on  the  part 
of  officials  who  favor  it  to  make  the  apparent  cost  as  small 
as  possible. 

Prof.  Adams  once  said:  "Facts  regarding  city 
financiering  are  simply  appalling.  It  is  not  too  much  to 
say  that  every  rule  laid  down  by  the  science  of  financer- 
ing  has  been  disregarded  by  our  cities."  The  political 
pressure  for  extension  of  the  service,  without  reference  to 
profitable  returns,  is  irresistible.  It  is  well  understood 
and  acknowledged  that  strict  economy  and  the  best  busi- 
ness methods  necessary  for  success  are  not  considered  under 
political  management.  It  is  useless  to  argue  that  politics 
will  not  creep  into  the  business.  History  proves  the  con- 
trary, and  parties  now  announce  that  they  favor  the  sys- 
tem as  an  inducement  for  votes.  Ex-mayor  Hewitt  says : 
"  However  well  disposed  the  officers  of  a  city  may  be 
toward  the  proper  performance  of  their  duty,  they  are 
necessarily  constrained  and  overruled  by  the  exigencies 
of  partisan  interests,  and  compelled  to  reward  political 
service  by  public  office." 

They  tell  us  that  the  corruption  and  frauds  of  the 
present  day  have  been  caused  by  the  acts  of  private  cor- 
porations ;  that  they  buy  and  bribe  city  officials,  and  that 
municipal  ownership  will  stop  all  of  this  demoralization 
and  misrule  under  which  cities  are  suffering. 

If  this  condition  exists,  as  they  claim,  and  city  offi- 
cials can  be  bought  or  bribed  by  corporations,  is  it  not 
certain  that,  when  such  men  have  the  direct  handling  of 
the  millions  involved  where  the  city  own  the  plant,  they 
would  certainly  supply  themselves  with  funds  at  the  city's 
expense?  If  the  man  was  dishonest  in  the  first  case, 
would  he  not  be  equally  so  in  the  latter?     If  we  were  to 


believe  their  statements,  we  must  concede  that  all  the 
scoundrels  in  this  country  belong  to  corporations,  and  that 
no  others  are  admitted  to  such  companies,  and  that 
none  of  this  class  were  ever  found  among  politicians  or 
ring  bosses.  There  must  be  two  parties  to  bribery.  The 
representative  of  the  corporation,  no  matter  how  venal, 
would  never  approach  an  official  for  this  purpose,  unless 
he  had  been  given  a  plain  intimation  that  the  official  was 
willing  to  participate  in  such  a  deal.  From  the  socialist 
standpoint,  there  is  nothing  dishonorable  in  the  official 
accepting  the  bribe,  but  the  party  representing  the  corpo- 
ration who  offers  it  is  the  greatest  scoundrel  in  existence. 
Are  not  both  equally  guilty? 

The  records  and  evidence  disclosed  in  New  York  and 
other  cities  shows  plainly  that  many  seek  such  offices  with 
the  expectation  of  such  offers,  and  are  figuring  for  what 
"there  is  in  it." 

As  Andrew  D.  White  once  remarked  ;  "  With  a  few 
exceptions,  the  city  governments  in  the  United  States  are 
the  worse  in  Christendom,  the  most  expensive  and  the 
most  corrupt." 

The  remedy  for  all  these  evils  complained  of  is  sim- 
ple. Elect  men  of  integrity  and  responsibility  to  these 
offices,  who  can  and  will  protect  its  citizens  against  not 
only  the  corporations,  but  the  bosses  and  political  thieves 
as  well.  Until  this  is  done,  all  the  plans  and  theories  of 
municipal  ownership  on  the  face  of  the  earth  will  not  con- 
vert a  dishonest  politician  and  cause  him  to  renounce  his 
hunger  and  greed  for  th'e  emoluments  and  pickings  to  be 
obtained  while  occupying  some  official  position. 

Harper  s  Weekly,  referring  to  the  politicians  and  ring 
bosses  of  Philadelphia,  says:  "They  are  reported  to  be 
in  affluent  circumstances,  or  on  the  high  road  to  wealth, 
although  in  many  instances  'the  salaries  attached  to  their 
positions  are  small,  as  in  the  case  of  the  magistrate,  or 
nothing  at  all  as  in  the  case  of  the  councilman.  How 
then  do  these  men  make  their  money?     Are  they  shrewd 


business  men  and  engaged  in  outside  enterprises  not 
purely  political  or  dependent  upon  the  action  of  political 
bodies  for  existence  or  favors?  But  two  out  of  the  thirty- 
seven  ward  leaders  are  men  of  means  acquired  before 
they  went  actively  into  politics.  The  question  therefore 
logically  arises,  did  they  make  their  money  through 
politics,  and  if  so.  by  what  means  ?" 

There  are  plenty  of  instances  where  capable  and  up- 
right men  have  held  office,  and  while  this  has  been  done, 
you  do  not  hear  of  any  concessions  made  to  corporations 
that  were  injurious  or  prejudicial  to  the  interest  of  its 
citizens.  If  such  men  are  elected  they  will  command  the 
confidence  and  respect  of  the  world,  and  will  perform 
their  duties  fearlessly,  and  inaugurate  a  system  of  order 
and  business  that  will  remedy  the  chaos  now  existing  in 
many  cities ;  besides,  by  this  course,  you  will  destroy  the 
feeling  that  there  is  a  moral  taint  attaching  to  any 
reputable  man  who  enters  a  contest  for  office. 

Referring  again  to  Judge  Dillon,  the  highest  au- 
thority on  municipal  law,  sa3-s :  ' '  Our  large  cities  are 
encountering  the  perils  of  corruption  and  fraud  on  a 
gigantic  scale,  engendered  by  the  large  revenues  and  offi- 
cial patronage  at  their  disposal,  and  the  disinclination, 
often  the  steady  refusal,  of  the  substantial  citizens,  to  take 
a  controlling  part  in  the  management  of  municipal 
affairs." 

/  The  whole  foundation  of  municipal  ownership  is 
based  upon  the  assumption  that  inexperienced  hired  em- 
ployes of  a  city,  who  have  not  a  dollar  at  risk  and  in 
many  cases  have  been  given  the  position  as  a  reward  for 
helping^  some  political  aspirant  to  office,  can  and  will  run 
the  plant  and  manage  the  business  more  successfully  than 
members  of  a  private  corporation,  notwithstanding  the 
latter  may  have  nearly  all  their  property  invested  in  the 
enterprise,  and  a  failure  means  ruin  for  them.  Is  it  not 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  men  under  such  conditions  will 
give  closer   attention  to  business,   and  guard  and  investi- 


gate  every  branch  and  detail  of  its  work?  It  is  a  well- 
settled  axiom  that  the  more  a  man  has  at  risk,  the  closer 
attention  he  gives  to  its  details  and  economy.. 

As  ex-mayor  Fitler  says:  "  A  little  mismanagement 
here,  a  little  extravagance  there,  would  change  the  divi- 
dends of  the  private  companies  to  municipal  deficits,  and 
when  they  advocate  municipal  operation  of  street  railway 
lines  they  advocate  an  experiment,  the  effect  of  which 
they  know  absolutely  nothing  about  and  have  no  possible 
means  of  calculating." 

Hon.  Charles  O'Connor  said  that  ' '  by  means  of  general 
laws  admitting  no  favoritism  or  partiality,  all  requisite 
facilities  through  corporate  forms  should  be  afforded 
individuals  for  conducting  every  description  of  lawful 
business,  so  as  to  prevent  any  needless  action  by  the 
municipality,  or  the  employment  of  its  officers  in  any 
affairs  that  could  be  committed  to  individuals  as  a  busi- 
ness." 

The  statement  of  the  city  clerk  of  Tacoma  shows  that 
when  the  city  furnished  their  own  power  it  cost  them  two 
and  sixty-four  one-hundredth  cents  per  kilowatt,  and  now 
they  buy  it  of  a  private  corporation  for  one  and  sixty-two 
hundredths  of  a  cent  per  kilowatt,  demonstrating  that  be- 
cause of  the  care  and  close  attention  given  to  the  business 
by  the  private  company  they  can  afford  to  furnish  the 
current  at  a  less  price  than  it  costs  the  city  to  produce  it  in 
their  own  plant. 

Every  one  knows  just  how  an  election  is  managed  in 
American  cities.  As  soon  as  a  man  is  elected  he  must  pay 
his  followers  for  their  support  by  distributing  the  offices  at 
his  command,  and  as  he  has  been  elected  by  the  political 
leaders'  management,  he  must  acquiesce  in  their  demands, 
no  matter  what  the  result  may  be  upon  the  affairs  of  the 
city.  This  has  been  the  rule  of  the  government  as  well 
as  municipalities,  and  an  official  in  the  post-office  depart- 
ment once  said:  "The  blind  policy  of  substituting 
inexperienced  for  experienced  men  comes  at  every  elec- 

10 


tion ;  wholej'^lines  are  stripped  of  their  experienced  men 
and  the  creatures  of  politicians  are  put  in  their  places." 

The  majority  of  voters  in  all  cities  are  practically 
non-taxpayers,  that  is,  they  pay  only  a  poll  tax,  and, 
therefore,  it  is  immaterial  to  them  what  the  expenses  are, 
provided  they  can  secure  the  favor  of  the  ward  boss,  and 
this  party  seeks  every  opportunity  of  impressing  upon 
them  his  ability  as  a  political  fighter.  The  North  Ameri- 
can Review  truly  sa.ys :  "The  constant  element  in  muni- 
cipal affairs  is  the  unremitting  desire  of  the  politician  to 
gather  masses  of  votes,  and  of  the  contractors  to  place 
men,  who  furnish  them,  to  prey  upon  the  city  treasury. 
The  people  who  do  not  pay  are  always  ready  to  create 
debts  against  the  people  who  must  pay." 

Prof.  Bryce  said:  "That  the  Pliiladelphia  gas  ring 
controlled  at  least  20,000  votes,  and  the  number  of  men 
employed  in  a  gas  plant  is  very  small  when  compared  with 
the  number  employed  in  other  lighting  works." 

We  are  told  that  where  city  owns  the  plant  they 
can  produce  the  lights  for  half  the  amount  it  costs  private 
companies,  but  it  has  never  been  proven,  and  can  not  be. 
Assertions  are  not  evidence,  while  it  is  a  fact  that  the  cost 
of  municipal  work  is  notoriously  greater.  We  have  an 
example  of  the  economy  of  public  work  in  the  capital  at 
Albany. 

John  Stewart  Mills  well  says:  "  The  mischief  begins 
when,  instead  of  calling  forth  the  activity  and  powers  of 
individuals,  it  substantiates  its  own  activity  for  theirs." 

It  is  well  known  that  municipal  ownership  is  purely 
and  simply  a  political  move  to  secure  votes  for  some 
aspirant  for  office,  and  that  it  is  used  for  this  purpose, 
legardless  of  any  other  question.  Parties  have  publicly 
announced  that  they  are  using  it  as  a  plank  upon  which  to 
stand  while  they  gather  in  the  votes.  It  has  become  a 
well-established  principle  with  both  political  parties  that 
city  government  is  the  legitimate  spoils  of  the  victorious 
party.       It  is  for  the  purpose  of  catching  the  votes  of  the 

11 


laboring  class  that  lower  rates  of  taxation,  with  -shorter 
hours  and  higher  wages,  are  promised,  but  these  are  for- 
gotten as  soon  as  the  election  has  passed,  as  was  shown  in 
Detroit  and  other  places. 

In  Alameda,  Cal.,  it  was  carried  so  far  that  men  were 
forced  to  work  in  the  municipal  plant  fourteen  hours  at  a 
run,  and  the  engineers  have  fainted  at  their  post  as  a 
result  of  such  overwork.  The  Alameda  Argus  says: 
"  The  light  it  sells  is  sold  at  a  loss.  As  a  business  venture 
Alameda's  experiment  is  a  rank  and  wretched  failure. 
As  a  pet  scheme  of  the  municipal  ownership  faddist  it  will 
flourish  as  long'  as  the  people  submit  to  the  high  taxes 
which  it  imposes." 

When  the  advocates  of  municipal  ownership  find 
themselves  unable  fo  disprove  the  facts  disclosed  under 
municipal  management  in  this  country,  they  immediately 
■  fall  back  upon  Glasgow  and  the  wonders  achieved  there 
by  municipal  ownership.  The  conditions  are  not  the 
same  in  Glasgow  as  are  found  in  the  United  States.  The 
government  is  entirely  different,  and  the  political  situation 
that  exists  in  this  country  is  not  found  there.  Wages 
there  are  less  than  half  those  paid  in  this  countr3^  Con- 
ductors on  street  cars  are  paid  93  cents  per  day  the  first 
year,  and  $1.04  the  third  year,  while  conductors  on  street 
cars  in  New  York  are  paid  §2.00  the  first  year  and  $2.25 
after  that.  The  average  wages  for  the  railroad  men  in 
Glasgow  are  78  cents  per  day,  while  in  New  York  it  is 
$1.88.  Here  we  have  a  difference  of  more  than  100  per 
cent  in  wages  alone. 

Any  one  who  has  traveled  over  the  street  railroads  in 
Glasgow  knows  perfectly  well  that  the  whole  equipment 
and  accommodations  are  antiquated  and  behind  the  age, 
while  the  service  furnished  there  would  not  be  tolerated 
in  any  city  in  the  United  States.  We  are  also  told  that 
the  profits  or  revenue  from  the  street  railway  in  Glasgow 
is  so  large  that  it  pays  all  the  expenses  of  the  government, 
while,  in  fact,  the  roads  are  not  operated  for  the  purpose 

12 


of  producing  a  revenue  to  meet  current  expenses  of  the 
municipality.  Instead  of  there  being  no  taxes  in  Glasgow, 
they  are  more  burdensome  than  in  this  country.  Rents 
are  taxed  12^  cents  on  every  dollar  that  a  man  pays,  and 
the  owner  of  the  property  has  to  pay  the  same  amount  of 
tax;  besides  this  license  taxes  are  levied.  You  pay  a  tax 
for  every  servant  you  employ  in  the  house,  also  on  every 
horse  or  carriage ;  in  fact,  you  cannot  turn  round  without 
running  against  a  tax  collector.  Mr.  Robert  Crawford  of 
Glasgow,  a  strong  advocate  of  the  system  in  that  city, 
says  :  "  Before  I  came  to  this  country  I  saw  no  reason  why 
American  cities  should  not  adopt  municipal  ownership,  and 
wondered  why  they  had  not  done  so.  But  now  that  I 
have  obtained  an  insight  into  the  conditions  that  prevail 
in  your  cities  I  have  entirely  changed  my  views.  As 
things  are  now  in  your  cities,  municipal  ownership  is  an 
impossibility.  Success  in  that  great  undertaking  is  out 
of  the  question  so  long  as  party  politics  figure  in  municipal 
elections,  and  so  long  as  city  offices  are  used  to  reward 
political  work.  With  the  conditions  that  exist  in  American 
cities  to-day,  municipal  ownership  is  utterly  impracticable. 
It  can  never  be  a  success  until  the  system  of  political 
rewards  is  entirely  divorced  from  city  government.  ' 

This  is  the  testimony  of  a  citizen  of  Glasgow  after  he 
had  visited  the  United  States  and  studied  our  political 
management. 

■  The  financiering  plans  of  socialists  and  economists,  as  give^i 
in  a  book  lately  published,  is  certainly  original.  They  say  : 
' '  The  bonded  debt  incurred  by  a  private  company  is  looked  upon 
as  a?i  investment,  and  not  a  burden — it  is  never  to  be  paid  off', 
ivhile,  on  the  other  liand,  in  a  public  industry  a  debt  is  a  burden 
to  be  liquidated  as  soon  as  possible."  That  is,  if  a  private  com- 
pany issues  bonds,  it  is  so  much  clear  gain,  they  will  never 
have  to  be  paid  ;  but  if  the  city  issues  them  they  are  a  debt, 
and  must  be  paid.  Perhaps  some  of  our  learned  friends  will 
tell  us  how  a  mortgage,  given  by  a  private  company,  is  an 
asset,  while  the  same  mortgage,  if  given  by  the  city,  is  a 

13 


liability  ?  Yet  such  arguments  are  advanced  in  the  support 
of  municipal  ownership. 

If  the  advocates  of  municipal  ownership  desired  to 
give  a  fair  comparison  between  private  and  public  owner- 
ship and  furnish  taxpayers  facts,  they  would  compare  the 
cost  by  the  two  systems  as  shown  at  the  present  time. 
Instead  of  this  they  quote  prices  charged  by  private  com- 
panies ten  years  ago,  when  everything  cost  more  than 
three  times  what  it  does  now,  and  then  compare  the  cost 
of  the  municipal  plant  at  the  present  day.  In  ISSS,  when 
the  private  companies  were  furnishing  the  lights,  the 
dynamo  used  cost  $43.20  per  arc,  while  the  lamps  cost 
$50.00 ;  now  the  dynamo  would  only  cost  $19  per  arc,  and 
the  lamps  $22.50.  Carbons  cost  then  from  $40  to  $50  p^r 
thousand,  now  they  can  be  bought  for  $10. 

Why  is  it  that  advocates  of  municipal  ownership  con- 
stantly decry  private  corporations  ?  Is  it  for  political 
effect,  or  to  cover  some  of  their  own  schemes  ? 

If  we  could  roll  back  the  wheels  of  time  for  one 
hundred  years,  we  should  find  people  trucking  their  grain 
to  market  with  ox  teams,  travelers  wending  their  way 
through  the  country  upon  horses  and  in  the. old  lumbering 
stage  coach  or  the  prairie  schooner,  dragging  its  slow  way 
across  the  continent ;  letters  and  papers  delivered  from 
five  days  to  nine  months  after  they  were  written  or 
printed ;  transactions  in  London  not  reported  in  New 
York  until  weeks  and  months  after  they  occurred,  while 
any  communication  with  California  was  almost  impossible. 

In  place  of  this  crude  and  expensive  system,  the  busi- 
ness man  of  to-day  can  breakfast  in  New  York  and  dine  in 
Buffalo,  or  he  can  leave  the  Atlantic  coast  on  Monday, 
climb  the  Rocky  Mountains,  covering  4, 000  miles  of  space, 
and  bask  in  the  genial  air  of  the  Pacific  coast  on  Friday ; 
sit  at  his  breakfast  table  and  read  the  accounts  of  what  was 
done  the  evening  before  in  England,  Russia,  China,  South 
Africa,  and,  in  fact,  news  from  every  civilized  country  in 
the  world ;    stand  at  his  counter  in  New  York  or  Boston 

14 


and  talk  with  his  agent  in  Chicago;  flash  a  message 
around  the  world  and  receive  an  answer  in  twenty  minutes. 
All  of  these  wonders  are  the  creation  of  private  cor- 
porations. It  is  these  corporations  that  have  made 
America  what  she  is,  the  grandest  and  most  powerful 
nation  upon  the  face  of  the  globe. 


15 


DEPRECIATION. 

"Depreciation  should  not  only  account  for  the  actual 
deterioration  of  the  apparatus  due  to  its  use,  but  should 
include  the  reduction  in  the  market  price  of  apparatus, 
and  the  loss  upon  apparatus  which  becomes  commercially- 
useless  through  the  progress  of  the  art,  as  well  as  those 
appliances  w^hich  may  become  valueless,  not  because  they 
are  worn  out  or  out  of  date,  but  because  the  growth  of  the 
business  in  that  particular  locality  makes  it  no  longer 
economical  to  use  them,  and  although  in  condition  to  do 
the  work  for  which  they  were  orginally  designed,  never- 
theless become  practically  useless  through  the  necessity 
for  a  reconstruction  or  rearrangement  of  the  works  to 
meet  new  conditions." 

Experience  is  the  best  teacher  and  will  demonstrate 
fully  the  length  of  time  apparatus  will  run  successfully. 
When  the  apparatus  becomes  worn,  and  is  old  and  an- 
tiquated, no  company  can  afford  to  use  it  on  account  of 
the  heavy  per  cent  of  loss  in  producing  the  lights.  For 
this  reason,  little  or  nothing  can  be  obtained,  for  the  old 
machinery  and  the  value  of  tlie  plant  when  renewed  would 
be  no  greater  than  when  first  erected. 

Wabash,  Ind.,  used  dynomos  and  lamps,  costing 
$1,800  for  six  years,  and  then  sold  them  for  old  junk. 

Alameda,  Cal.,  sold  apparatus  costing  $20,000,  after 
seven  years'  use,  for  $350. 

Xenia,  Ohio,  sold  apparatus  costing  $35,000  for 
$10,000,  after  using  it  eight  years. 

Marcaline,  Mo.,  sold  apparatus  costing  $1,600  for 
$800,  and  only  used  it  nine  years. 

Michigan  City  bought  apparatus  and  paid  $10,000, 
used  it  six  years,  and  sold  it  for  $2,500. 

16 


Moline  paid  Slo.uOO  for  apparatus,  used  it  eight 
years,  and  sold  it  for  $S,000. 

Gravesend,  L.  I.,  paid  $120,000  for  apparatus,  kept  it 
two  years,  and  sold  it  for  $30,000. 

Bloomfield,  Iowa,  purchased  dynamos  in  1891  and  in 
1896  ;  they  failed  and  had  to  be  replaced  with  new  ones,  at 
an  expense  of  $5,000. 

Hull,  Mass.  voted  to  borrow  $2,000  to  pay  for  repairs 
caused  by  an  accident  during  the  year. 

Marquette,  Mich.,  paid  $15,000  for  replacing  appa- 
ratus in  one  year. 

Northfield,  Vt.,  had  to  spend  $8,700  to  replace  ma- 
chinery after  using  it  two  years. 

Topeka,  Kan.,  sold  apparatus  costing  $20,000  for 
$1,500. 

Bay  City,  Mich.,  had  to  replace  their  engine  after 
six  years'  use. 

The  experts  employed  by  the  mayor  of  Springfield^ 
111.,  made  the  depreciation  10  per  cent  per  year. 

The  committee  appointed  by  congress  made  it  10  per 
cent. 

The  mayor  of  Decatur,  111.,  said  after  several  years' 
experience  with  a  municipal  plant,  that  if  10  per  cent  was 
allowed  for  repairs,  and  then  10  per  cent  added  for  depre- 
ciation, it  would  not  be  too  much. 

The  mayor  of  Rock  Falls,  111.,  says  :  It  will  be 
noticed  that  I  have  figured  a  10  per  cent  depreciation  of 
plant.  This  is  by  no  means  a  high  estimate  for  property 
of  this  class,  and  is  one  that  it  is  absolutely  necessary  to 
take  into  consideration.  It  is  a  plain  business  proposition, 
that  any  institution  to  be  a  safe,  not  to  say  profitable  in- 
vestment, must  be  capable  of  maintaining  itself  against 
depreciation,  that  the  property  may  at  any  time  be  worth 
to  its  owner  its  original  cost.  There  would  be  no  surer 
way  for  the  city  to  lose  money  than  to  run  the  electric 
light  plant  at  a  rate  of  income  that  only  paid  operating 
expenses.     In  the  end,  the  plant  must  become  worthless 

17 

(2) 


through  lack  of  maintenance,  and  the  original  investment 
would  certainly  be  lost." 

The  superintendent  of  the  municipal  plant  at  Sharps- 
burg,  Pa.,  says  they  paid  $20,000  for  the  plant,  but  can 
duplicate  it  complete  for  $10,000. 

The  engineer  who  constructed  the  Ypsilanti,  Mich., 
plant  says  that  10. per  cent  depreciation  is  very  low. 

The  manager  of  the  municipal  plant  at  Marietta, 
Ohio,  says  cannot  be  made  less  than  10  per  cent. 

The  experts  at  the  Philadelphia  investigation  made  it 
10  per  cent. 

The  best  expert  in  England  states  that  ]0  per  cent 
is  as  low  as  it  can  be  calculated. 

Oxford,  Ohio,  paid  $25,000  for  a  plant,  and  can  now 
duplicate  it  for  $12,000. 

Marshalltown,  Iowa,  paid  $-1,000  for  two  dynamos, 
and  abandoned  them  after  10  years  use,  and  can  not  sell 
them  for  more  than  $600. 

Detroit  started  plant  in  1895,  and  in  1899  the  lighting 
commission  asked  for  $38,000  to  replace  some  of  their 
dynamos  with  new  ones.  * 

A  private  company  sold  a  dynamo,  costing  $1,900, 
for  $260,  after  six  years  use. 

Taunton,  Mass.,  installed  a  municipal  plant  in  1897. 
In  March,  1898,  the  mayor  sent  a  communication  to  the 
city  council,  notifying  them  of  the  breaking  down  of  the 
engine  in  the  municipal  plant,  and  recommended  that 
$5,000  be  appropriated  to  purchase  a  new  engine  and  pre- 
pare a  foundation  for  same. 

Logansport,  Ind.,  had  to  expend  $12,000  in  replacing 
their  engines  and  boilers,  installed  four  years  before. 

Mayor  Quincy  of  Boston,  when  he  made  the  ten-year 
contract  with  the  private  company  to  furnish  the  lights, 
inserted  in  the  contract  the  following  agreement :  "  The 
company  are  allowed  to  charge  off,  as  against  the  city, 
such  depreciation  as  it  actually  provides  for,  but  not  ex- 
ceeding seven  per  cent  per  annum  on  its  total  investment, 

18 


exclusive  of  land.  This  limit  was  fixed  after  careful 
consideration,  and  in  the  opinion  of  the  city  engineer  it 
represents  no  more  than  a  proper  allowance  for  this  pur- 
pose. The  principle  of  providing  for  the  depreciation  of 
a  plant  which  deterioates,  or  becomes  obsolete  as  rapidly 
as  an  electric  light  plant  does,  is  the  only  proper  one,  and 
it  seemed  to  me  that  sound  public  policy  required  the  city 
to  provide  for  a  sufficient  allowance  for  depreciation, 
rather  than  ignore  this  necessary  element  of  cost,  as  is 
too  often  done." 

The  city  clerk's  books  of  Little  Rock  show  that  they 
spent  between  1888  and  1892  $39,704.80  constructing  the 
electric  plant. 

In  1894  they  appropriated  $30,000  more,  making  a 
total  of  $09,022. 

In  the  city  clerk's  report  for  1895  he  states  that  the 
total  value  of  the  plant  at  that  time  was  $35,000. 

Here  is  a  shrinkage  of  about  50  per  cent  in  less  than 
seven  years.  If  there  is  only  three  per  cent  depreciation 
on  electrical  apparatus,  as  claimed  by  advocates  of  muni- 
cipal ownership,  why  is  it  that  a  plant  costing  $69,622  at 
the  end  of  seven  years  is  only  worth  $35,000,  and  at  the 
end  of  ten  years,  in  1899,  it  is  necessary  to  spend  $50,000 
more  to  put  the  plant  in  proper  shape  to  do  their  business? 

Halletsville,  Texas,  had  to  abandon  their  old  plant  and 
construct  a  new  one,  the  old  one  being  out  of  date. 

Toledo,  Ohio,  invested  $2,000,000  in  a  municipal 
plant,  and  after  ten  years  the  highest  bid  they  could  get 
for  it  was  $300,000,  making  a  loss  of  $1,700,000. 

Swanton,  Vt.,  a  pulley  burst  and  destroyed  instantly 
a  dynamo  that  cost  $3,000  to  replace,  and  it  only  had  been 
used  a  short  time. 

Ex-mayor  Matthews  of  Boston,  whose  ability  and 
integrity  is  beyond  question,  after  an  examination  of  the 
municipal  plant  at  Detroit,  says:  "We  must  make  full 
allowance  for  the  depreciation  in  the  plant  due  to  wear 


19 


and  tear,  to  the  progress  of  invention,  and  to  the  occasional 
necessity  for  enlargement  and  reconstruction. 

"  I  estimate  a  proper  allowance  for  depreciation  on 
this  plant  as  follows  ;  Buildings,  machine  shop,  scales, 
etc.,  four  per  cent;  steam  plant,  seven  per  cent  ;  electric 
plant  and  overhead  system,  ten  per  cent  ;  conduits  and 
cables,  five  per  cent. 

"  These  allowances  average  about  seven  and  one-half 
per  cent  on  the  first  cost  of  the  plant,  exclusive  of  the 
land. 

"  Depreciation  is  the  main  reason  why  portions  of  an 
electric  light  plant  must,  from  time  to  time,  be  discarded 
and  sold  for  old  material,  but  is  not,  however,  due  to  the 
actual  use  and  wear  of  the  machinery,  but  to  the  fact  that 
the  progress  of  electrical  invention  is  so  rapid  that  from 
time  to  time  entirely  new  machinery  is  put  upon  the  mar- 
ket, so  superior  in  economy  of  operation  that  the  electric 
light  companies  cannot  afford  to  keep  the  old  machinery, 
and  to  the  further  fact  that  no  electric  light  plant  is  laid  out 
at  the  outset  of  sufficient  dimensions  to  accommodate  the 
growth  of  business  indefinitely,  and  accordingly  there 
arises  a  periodic  necessity  for  reconstruction  and  enlarge- 
ment, which  incidentally  involves  the  destruction  or 
abandonment  of  a  part,  often  a  considerable  part,  of  the 
existing  buildings  and  machinery.  These  considerations 
are,  of  course,  well  known  to  everybody  interested  in 
electric  lighting. 

"  Some  persons,  also,  while  admitting  that  the  depre- 
ciation in  electric  light  plants,  due  to  these  causes,  has 
been  fully  six  or  seven  per  cent  during  the  ten  years  just 
past,  contend  that  no  such  rate  of  depreciation  is  to  be 
expected  in  the  future ;  but  to  this  it  may  be  replied  that 
the  experience  of  the  recent  past  is  the  only  safe  guide  to 
the  probabilites  of  the  future,  and  that  the  manufacturers 
of  electric  lighting  apparatus  are  no  more  confident  that 
the  limit  of  invention  has  been  reached  in  this  branch  of 
industry  now  than  they  were  ten  years  ago." 

20 


William  Jackson,  city  engineer  of  Boston,  says  that  a 
fund  or  account  should  be  created  to  cover  depreciation, 
renewals,  etc.  (as  disting^uished  from  repairs),  and  that  the 
payments  to  this  fund  should  amount  annually  to  two  per 
cent  of  the  cost  of  the  buildings,  five  per  cent  of  the  cost 
of  boilers,  etc.,  and  ten  per  cent  of  the  cost  of  engines, 
generators  and  other  electrical  apparatus,  including  all 
outside  construction.  These  percentages  will  be  found, 
when  added  together,  to  amount  to  from  seven  to  seven 
and  one-half  per  cent  of  the  first  cost  of  the  entire  plant, 
or  sufficient,  if  invested  in  a  sinking  fund,  to  equal,  with 
the  annual  increment  thereon,  the  first  cost  of  the  plant  in 
about  ten  years. 

An  advocate  of 'municipal  ownership,  who  claims 
nothing  should  be  allowed  for  depreciation,  says:  **  Sup- 
posing there  is  a  depreciation  in  the  municipal  plant, 
suppose  the  whole  plant,  costing  half  a  million,  is  lost,  all 
that  is  necessary  to  do  is  to  levy  a  tax  and  replace  it ;  if  it 
is  squandered,  there  is  plenty  more  that  can  be  procured 
by  taxing  the  property  of  the  citizens."' 

The  following  extracts  from  the  report  of  the  lighting 
commission  of  Detroit,  published  in  the  Detroit  JournaL 
shows  the  condition  of  the  plant  under  their  plan  of  three 
per  cent  depreciation  : 

"  The  public  lighting  plant  has  been  allowed  wofully 
to  deteriorate.  The  entire  power  plant  will  have  to  be 
overhauled.  The  lamps  have  not  been  renovated  for  two 
years  and  are  causing  great  trouble.  The  roofs  of  the  power 
house  are  leaky  and  defective.  The  line  poles  are  rolling 
away.  There  is  no  reserve  power  in  the  plant  and  more 
power  must  be  added.  The  machinery  and  lines  have  not 
been  properly  maintained  and  will  have  to  be  overhauled 
and  repaired.  The  dock  back  of  the  works  is  rotting 
away." 

Here  is  the  history  as  given  by  their  own  commission 
of  what  is  claimed  to  be  the  most  successful  municipal 
plant  in  the  United  States. 

21 


MUNICIPAL  PLANTS  SOLD  OR  ABANDONED. 

ABERDEEN,  Miss.,  owned  the  electric  plant.  It  proved  a  failure, 
and  they  sold  it  to  a  private  company  and  made  a  contract  with  them  for 
the  lights. 

The  following  correspondence  explains  itself: 

Dear  Sir  : — 

Replying  to  your  favor,  I  desire  to  say  we  have  a  contract  with  the 
city.  They  owned  a  plant  and  run  their  own  lights,  but  it  cost  them 
S700  a  year  more  than  it  does  now  under  our  contract.  We  boiight 
their  machinery,  etc. 

Yours  truly. 

AUDUBON,  Iowa,  tried  municipal  ownership  and  failed,  then 
leased  the  plant  to  private  parties  and  made  contract  with  them  for 
lights,  and  the  lights  are  now  furnished  by  the  lessee. 

PORTSMOUTH,  Ohio,  operated  the  municipal  plant  for  seven 
years,  but  could  not  make  it  profitable,  and  rented  it  to  a  private  com- 
pany and  made  a  contract  with  them  for  lights. 

WYTHEVILLE,  Va.,  invested  $10,000  in  an  electric  plant.  It 
proved  a  failure,  and  they  turned  it  over  to  a  private  company  and  made 
a  contract  for  lights. 

WABASH,  Ind.— Dear  Sir  :— Our  city  put  in  an  arc  lighting 
plant  about  1878,  and  ran  it  for  nine  years.  After  that  the  city  made  a 
contract  with  the  Electric  Light  Co,,  and  this  has  been  continued  ever 
since. 

The  old  municipal  plant  was  sold  for  junk.     It  cost  $18,000. 

Yours  respectfully. 

It  is  claimed  that  three  per  cent  will  cover  all  depreciation,  but  this 
city,  after  using  the  aparatus  for  only  nine  years,  sold  it  for  junk. 

MOLINE,  111.— Dear  Sir  :— We  bought  the  Moline  City  plant 
because  we  could  furnish  them  lights  cheaper  than  they  could  run  them 
from  their  water  works.  The  plant  cost  them  $15,000  and  we  paid  them 
$8,000  for  it.  It  cost  them  to  run  their  lights  for  the  four  years  they 
operated  the  plant  a  little  over  $93.00  per  light.  We  have  contracted 
with  them  for  $84.00  per  light,  2,000  candle  power,  run  whenever  it  is 
dark  and  they  dock  us  if  lights  are  out. 

Yours  truly, 

PEOPLE'S  POWER  CO. 

99 


MARCALINE,  Mo.— Dear  Sik  :— The  citj'  ran  the  plant  a  few 
years  auil  g:ave  it  up  as  a  bad  job,  findiufjc  it  very  expensive.  After 
lyiuf?  idle  some  time,  it  was  sold  to  the  private  company  now  running  it 
for  about  sISOO,  which  was  paid  in  service.  The  property  was  never 
worth  anything  like  the  price  paid  for  it  by  the  city. 

Yours  truly. 

The  plant  cost  810,000  and  they  sold  it  for  8800,  taking  their  pay  in 
service. 

BERKLEY,  Cal. ,  not  lieing  able  to  operate  the  plant  successfully, 
after  spending  a  large  amount  of  money,  turned  it  over  to  a  private 
company,  who  have  operated  the  lights  on  contract  since  that  time. 

TACOMA,  Wash.  — Dear  Sir:— The  city  clerk  writes  saying  the 
Railway  Company  furnish  the  city  power  more  cheaply  than  the  city 
could  furnish  its  own.  It  cost  the  city  2.G-1  cents  per  kilowat  and  we 
buy  it  at  1.62i  cents,  and  we  have  made  a  five  years'  contract  with  a  pri- 
vate company.  Previous  to  making  this  contract  with  the  private  com- 
pany, and  while  the  city  operated  their  own  power  plant,  they  lost  $19,000 
per  year. 

CARROLTON,  Ga.— Dear  Sir  :— The  plant  was  sold  to  me  because 
the  town  could  not  run  it  satisfactorily,  and  for  the  purpose  of  getting 
1)etter  lights  for  city  and  commercial  lighting.  They  pay  me  $30.00 
each  per  year  for  incandescent  lights. 

Yours  truly, 

C.  R.  TURNER. 

HOPE,  Ark.— Dear  Sir  :— Myself  and  associates  have  purchased 
the  Hope  water  and  light  plant.  The  city  sold  it  because  they  needed  a 
larger  plant  and  they  hud  no  money  for  improvements. 

Yours  respectfully. 
This  town  has  sold  its  water  works  and  electric  light  plants  and 
granted  a  twenty-five  years'  franchise. 

Yours  truly, 
S.  A.  KINGTON, 

Recorder,  Town  of  Hope. 

MICHIGAN  CITY,  Ind.— Dear  Sir  :— In  reply  to  your  inquiry 
will  say  we  have  sold  our  lighting  plant  for  $2,500,  and  have  contracted 
with  a  private  company  for  ten  years. 

Respectfully  yours, 

M.  T.  KRIDCtER,  Mayor. 
The  plant  cost  $10,000  and  they  sold  it  for  $2,500. 

STOCKTON,  Kas.— Dear  Sir  :— Replying  to  yours  will  say  that 
this  city  has  abandoned  its  plant. 

The  reason  we   aljandoned    the   scheme   was   that  it   did   not  pay 

expenses. 

Respectfully  yours. 

23 


Portland,  ore. — Dear  sir:— The  municipal  plant  was  sold  to 
the  Electric  Light  Co.     "We  are  now  paying  about  two  prices  for  lights. 

Yours  truly. 

Here  is  a  case  where  the  taxpayers  were  willing  to  pay  two  prices 
for  lights  to  a  private  company  rather  than  operate  their  municipal 
plant  any  longer. 

HUDSON"  COUNTY,  N.  J.,  invested  about  $100,000  in  a  munici- 
pal plant.  It  was  not  a  success.  Numerous  complaints  regarding  the 
inefficiency  of  the  county  employes  in  charge  of  the  plant,  and  of  fre- 
quent breaking  down  of  the  machinery,  have  been  made. 

The  failure  of  the  plant  to  do  the  work  expected  disgusted  all  parties 
and  they  voted  to  abandon  it,  and  have  contracted  with  a  private  com- 
pany for  the  lights. 

.  The  iV.  y.  Advertiser  says  we  commend  the  freeholders  for  decid- 
ing to  abandon  the  job  of  lighting  the  Boulevard,  and  if  this  decision 
had  been  reached  three  years  earlier  it  would  have  saved  the  county 
$65,000.  The  freeholders  should  have  kept  politics  and  political  heelers 
away  from  the  lighting  plant. 

PHILADELPHIA  GAS  WORKS,  a  failure,  millions  involved. 
The  municipal  gas  plant  that  advocates  of  municipal  ownership  have 
cited  time  and  again  as  an  illustration  of  the  benefit  to  be  derived  where 
a  city  owned  the  plant,  has  been  proven  an  utter  failure  and  been  leased 
to  a  private  company  for  thirty  years. 

The  strongest  argument  against  municipal  ownership  of  the  century. 
After  a  practical  experience  of  over  thirty  years  and  a  loss  of  millions  of 
dollars  the  system  has  been  abandoned.  Advocates  of  municipal  own- 
ership have  proclaimed  before  every  committee  and  in  every  paper  pub- 
lished favoring  the  system  that  they  were  making  money.  When  the 
truth  is  known  and  the  secrets  of  the  huge  political  machine  is  exposed, 
it  disoioses  the  most  stupendous  fraud,  mismanagement  and  deceptive 
bookkeeping  ever  conceived. 

XENIA,  Ohio.— Dear  Sir:— 1  purchased  the  municipal  plant  of 
this  city  for  $10,000  ;  it  cost  $35,000. 

Yours  truly. 

TIPTON,  Iowa.— Dear  Sir  :— Eeplying  to  your  favor  I  have  to 
say  that  our  water  works  and  electric  light  plant  were  destroyed  by 
tire.  The  destruction  was  practicallj^  complete,  about  the  only  thing 
saved  being  our  artesan  well.  The  loss  was  surely  $2,500,  and  I  believe 
much  more. 

Yours  respectfully. 

T.  B.  MANLEY,  Mayor. 
After  this  the  city  gave  a  franchise  to  a  private  company  and  made  a 
contract  for  the  lights. 

24 


GRAVESEND,  L.  I.,  furniBhes  the  most  glaring  incident  of  the 
■waste  of  niuuicipal  funds.  They  sold  a  lot  of  the  town  common  lands 
and  put  the  proceeds  into  a  municipal  electric  light  plant,  costing 
$120,000.  In  1897,  an  oiler  was  made  of  ."?2,50U  for  its  poles,  and  another 
offer  of  .flO.OOO  for  the  whole  p|ant.  Since  then  the  plant  has  been 
eokl  to  the  Edison  Company  of  Brooklyn  for  !*31.000.  Part  of  this  will 
he  eaten  up  by  other  charges,  and  is  all  the  town  has  to  show  for  lauds 
which  were  sold  at  a  price  far  below  their  real  value  in  order  to  install 
this  municipal  plant. 

LE  ROY,  N.  Y. ,  was  using  lights  furnished  by  a  private  company. 
Advocates  of  municipal  ownership  represented  to  the  tax  payers  that  if 
the  municipality  owned  the  plant  a  great  saving  could  be  effected.  At 
that  time  the  Hydraulic  Co.  offered  to  light  the  streets  for  82,000  per 
3'ear  for  a  term  of  five  j'ears.  The  taxpayers  were  induced  to  adopt  the 
plan  of  municipal  ownership.  Now  the  report  made  to  the  tax  paj-ers 
by  the  officials  calls  for  84,938  to  run  the  plant  with  the  same  number  of 
lights  as  offered  by  the  private  company.  They  were  also  induced  to 
invest  820,000  in  the  gas  plant  because  it  would  be  a  profitable  invest- 
ment. Now  the  report  shows  receipts  to  be  81. ■'500  and  they  have  got  to 
spend  81.440  for  coal,  leaving  them  800  with  which  to  pay  the  interest 
upon  ^20,000  and  pay  the  wages  of  all  the  help  needed  to  run  the  plant 
and  make  inecessary  repairs.  They  compelled  the  private  comi)any  to 
sell  the  i)lant  to  them.  It  turns  out  that  the  ballot  authorizing  the 
municipal  plant  was  illegal  and  Justice  White  of  Buffalo  decides  that 
they  cannot  hold  same.  With  their  present  knowledge  of  the  business 
and  their  experience,  the  decision  is  looked  upon  as  a  fortunate  deliver- 
ance from  a  financial  burden,  and  the  people  are  congratulating  them- 
selves over  their  escape. 

FINDLAY,  Ohio,  tried  municipal  ownership  with  a  gas  plant,  could 
not  succeed  and  have  sold  it  to  a  private  companj*. 
Dear  Sir  : 

This  company  has  purchased  the  municipal  gas  plant  from  the  city. 
It  was  turned  over  to  our  company  March  29th,  1899.     This  company  is 
now  furnishing  gas  to  the  city  under  a  contract. 
We  are  truly  yours, 

J.  M.  BAEK,  President. 

MADISON,  Ind  -1)e.\r  Sir  :     We  bought  the  municipal  plant  of 
this  city  and  are  furnishing  the  lights  under  contract. 
Yours  trulj'. 

CHEHALIS,  Wash.,  invested  !f2(;,0C0  in  an  electric  plant,  and 
and  being  unable  to  manage  it  successful!}',  leased  it  to  a  private  party 
and  made  a  contract  with  them  to  furnish  the  street  lights, 

DAYTON,  Tenu.  Plant  is  closed  and  for  sale.  Citizens  say  plant 
can  be  bought  cheap. 


COLUMBUS,  Ohio. — Director  Kaiififman  of  the  waterworks  depart- 
ment, Columbus,  Ohio,  has  announced  that  in  his  opinion  the  municipal 
electric  lighting  plant,  operated  in  connection  with  the  water  works,  is 
one  of  the  expensive  features  of  his  department,  and  should  be  aban- 
doned. The  annual  report  of  the  director  will  show  that  the  cost  of 
operating  the  municipal  plant  per  lamp  more  than  doubles  the  cost  of 
the  contract  lamps  at  the  present  time.  The  city  council  has  ordered 
an  investigation. 

COLUMBUS,  Ohio. — The  electric  light  fund  of  this  city  has  become 
exhausted,  and  Director  Kauffman  has  announced  that  the  municipal 
lighting  plant  which  furnishes  current  for  350  lights  on  the  north  side  of 
the  city  will  be  abandoned.  The  companies  furnishing  contract  lamps 
have  been  notified  to  re -distribute  their  lamps  in  order  to  cover  the  ter- 
ritory in  the  best  manner  possible. 

BRAINERD,  Minn. — Deak  Sik  :  I  enclose  report  made  by  a  com- 
mittee of  the  city  council : 

We  respectfully  recommend  that  the  question  of  the  sale  of  the 
plant  be  submitted  to  a  vote  of  the  electors  of  this  city.  The  proposition 
meets  with  our  approval  and  our  reasons  are  as  follows  :  First — If  the 
plant  is  not  sold,  the  city  must,  in  a  short  time,  expend  large  sums  of 
money  to  make  it  serviceable.  Second — The  ownership  of  the  plant  by 
the  city  has  not  proven  profitable  to  the  city,  and  without  criticising 
anybody,  we  must  say  the  service  has  been  poor  and  not  satisfactory. 
Third — We  may  be  reasonably  certain  that  we  shall  get  better  service  if 
the  plant  is  sold. 

The  tax  payers  confirmed  this  action  by  an  overwhelming  majority 
and  the  plant  was  sold  ;  the  purchaser  failed  to  pay  for  it  and  it  was 
thrown  back  upon  the  city. 

BOSTON,  Mass.'  experience  with  municipal  ownership:  Those 
who  believe  in  municipal  and  government  ownership  and  control  of  most 
productive  agencies  may  find  some  pertinent  facts  in  the  report  just 
made  by  Mr.  William  Brophy,  chief  electrician  of  the  Boston  wire  de- 
partment, to  Mayor  Hart,  on  the  electrical  construction  division  of  the 
public  buildings  department.  Several  years  ago.  Mayor  Quincy  inaug- 
urated the  electrical  construction  division  along  with  the  city  printing 
plant,  to  protect  the  city  treasury  from  the  extortions  of  private  dealers 
and  contractors.  So  well  has  the  plan  succeeded  in  the  electrical  con- 
struction division  that  the  city  has  paid  from  two  to  three  times  as  much  for 
a  large  amount  of  work  as  private  contractors  wished  to  charge,  and  the 
division  is  now  to  be  closed  out  as  soon  as  possible.  The  great  difference 
between  the  cost  of  work  done  by  the  city  force  and  the  face  of  the 
tenders  for  the  same  by  private  concerns  seems  to  have  been  largely 
due  to  the  class  of  labor  employed.  This  point  is  put  with  no  lack  of 
clearness  in  Mr.  Brophy 's  own  words.  He  says  :  "A  glance  at  the  pay- 
rolls shows  that  nearly  60  per  cent  of  the  men  whose  names  they  contain 

26 


were  appofntecl  at  the  request  of  certain  prominent  gentlemen,  who,  to 
say  the  least,  are  not  the  best  judges  of  the  necessary  iiualitications  of 
the  employes  of  this  depiirtmeut.  Electrical  contractors  employ  only 
a  sutlicient  number  of  men  to  meet  the  requirements  of  their  busiueKS. 
Not  so  with  the  head  of  this  department,  for  when,  in  his  judgment, 
the  force  should  be  reduced,  owing  to  lack  of  business,  he  meets  with  a 
most  decided  opposition  from  the  friends  of  the  men  whose  services 
sound  businesb  principles  prompt  him  to  dispense  with.  In  nine  cases 
out  of  ten  the  men  solected  for  dismissal,  because  their  serWces  are  not 
required,  owe  their  appointment  to  some  active  politician,  high  in  the 
councils  of  his  party,  who  sees  to  it  that  his  friends  are  reinstated, 
regardless  of  the  city's  interest  of  the  condition  of  its  treasury.  As  a 
result  of  this  unwarrantable  interference,  men  are  kept  on  the  paj'-roll 
whose  services  are  not  needed,  and  others  who  never  should  have  been 
emploj-ed.  Discipline,  which  is  so  necessary  for  the  success  of  any 
establishment,  cannot  be  maintained  in  this  department  so  long  as  a 
large  i)ercentage  of  its  employes  can  retain  their  position,  not  through 
any  effort  of  their  own,  but  owing  to  party  exigencies."  It  is  charged 
in  the  report  that  unnecessary  work  has  been  undertaken  by  the  elect- 
rical construction  division  in  order  to  keep  a  large  number  of  men 
employed.  One  instance,  where  it  was  sought  to  undertake  a  very  large 
and  entirelj'  unnecessary  piece  of  work,  is  said  to  be  that  of  the  new 
court  house,  where  the  wiring  was  reported  to  endanger  the  building, 
and  a  request  was  sent  to  the  judges  to  have  it  rewired  by  the  electrical 
construction  division.  On  examination  by  Mr.  Brophy,  the  wiring  at 
the  court  house  was  found  iu  satisfactory  condition. 

The  report  goes  on  to  give  items  of  equipment  and  cost  for  a  large 
number  of  plants  installed  by  the  electrical  construction  division.  Three 
of  the  East  Boston  ferryboats  have  been  equipped  with  electric  light 
plants  at  a  total  cost  of  n10,20U  by  the  electric  construction  division.  A 
bid  for  the  complete  electrical  equipment  on  these  three  boats  and  one 
other  was  received  from  the  General  Electric  Company,  the  price  being 
$6,800.  Per  lamp  installed  the  General  Electric  jirice  was  $33.61,  while 
the  cost  to  the  city  through  the  electric  construction  division  was  $47.22 
per  lamp.  On  another  boat  the  Westinghouse  Company  bid  the  sum  of 
$3,1)00  for  a  complete  plant,  and  the  electrical  construction  division  did 
the  job  at  a  cost  of  $rj,yuO  to  the  city.  Figures  for  land  work  done  by 
the  division  seem  about  as  high  in  proportion  as  do  those  upon  the 
water.  The  Ann  White  Yose  Building  at  the  city  hospital  was  wired  at 
a  total  cost  of  $4,754.56,  or  $12.5)0  per  outlet,  the  estimated  cost  being 
$4.50  per  outlet.  The  English  High  School  was  wired  for  a  total  cost  of 
$3,797.40,  or  |5.55  per  lamp,  the  estimated  fair  cost  being  $2.25  per 
lamp.  In  the  Irvingtou  Street  Armory  943  incandescent  and  24  arc 
lamps  were  installed  at  a  cost  of  $6,683.47,  the  fair  estimated  cost  being 
$2,571.75,  or  38  per  cent  of  the  actual  sum  paid  out.  All  of  the  plants 
cited  in  the  report  of  Mr.  Brophy  shows  about  the  above  proportions 
between  actual  and  fair  estimated  cost. 

On  all  of  the  work  reported  the  labor  item  shows  nnich  more  than 

27 


its  usual  per  cent  of  the  total  cost  for  complete  equipments;  The  per- 
centage of  labor  to  the  total  cost  varies  from  47  to  62  per  cent,  being  in 
most  in  stances  nearer  the  higher  figure.  In  closing,  Mr.  Brophy  says  : 
"  I  think  it  best  for  you  to  discontinue  the  electrical  construction  divi- 
sion, that  has  proved  a, rest  for  the  Tveary,  a  spawning  bed  for  embryo 
statesman,  and  has  accomplished  so  little  of  the  real  work  for  which  it 
was  organized,  viz, ,  guarding  the  city  treasury  against  the  rapacity  of 
electrical  contractors  and  dealers." 

AFTON,  Iowa,  invested  $6,500  in  an  electric  light  plant,  but  could 
not  succeed  and  leased  it  to  a  private  party  and  made  contract  for  lights, 

ONTONAGON,  Mich,— Dear  Sir: — We  have  not  operated  plant 
since  1896  ;  part  of  the  town  and  all  of  our  lines  were  destroyed  at  that 
time. 

T,  MOSS, 

The  following  report  comes  from 

HERRINGTON,  Kan.— The  council  has  determined  to  close  down 
the  city  electric  light  plant  owing  to  the  excess  of  expenses  over 
receipts.  The  deficiency  up  to  the  end  of  last  year  was  f  5,200,  and  for 
some  time  it  has  been  running  behind  at  the  rate  of  $200  a  month. 


28 


ARC  AND  INCANDESCENT  LIGHTS  FUR- 
NISHED BY  PRIVATE  COMPANIES  AND 
MUNICIPAL  PLANTS. 

So  many  wild  claims  have  been  made  by  the  advocates 
of  municipal  ownership  regarding  the  number  of  lights 
that  municipalities  were  furnishing,  that  we  give  the  fol- 
lowing table,  taken  from  the  latest  reports,  showing  the 
arc  and  incandescent  lights  furnished  by  private  companies 
and  municipal  plants  in  all  the  states. 

This  proves  that  all  of  the  municipal  plants  in  the 
United  States  are  only  producing  8,905  arc  lights,  as  com- 
pared with  264,124  furnished  by  private  companies.  That 
only  522,257  incandescent  lights  are  furnished  by  muni- 
cipal plants,  while  private  companies  are  producing 
8,588,194. 

The  state  of  New  York  has  only  1,223  arc  and  11,900 
incandescent  lights  produced  in  municipal  plants,  while 
private  companies  in  that  state  furnish  46,233  arc  and 
1,440,133  incandescents,  being  37,328  more  arc  lights  and 
917,786  incandescents  in  that  state  alone  than  are  produced 
by  all  the  municipal  plants  in  the  United  States. 

Connecticut  has  only  1S5  arc  and  5,500  incandescent 
owned  by  municipalities,  while  private  companies  furnish 
0,281  arc  and  134,538  incandescents. 

Massachusetts  has  2,027  arc  and  33,500  incandescents 
furnished  by  municipal  plants,  and  there  are  20,317  arc 
and  732,515  incandescents  from  private  plants. 

The  same  comparison  applies  to  all  the  states. 

In  some  states  not  a  single  arc  or  incandescent  light  is 
furnished  from  a  municipal  plant,  while  in  a  large  number 
of  the  states  the  list  is  so  infinitely  small  that  they  would 
hardly  be  noticed,  and  nearly  all  of  them  in  small  villages. 

29 


State. 


Private  Companies 
Arc. 


Municipal  Plants. 


Alabama 2,802 

Arizona 215 

Arkansas 993 

California 9,745 

Colorado 3,584 

Connecticut 5,281 

Delaware 200 

Florida 1,552 

Georgia 3, 962 

Idaho 284 

Illinois 15,102 

Indiana 9,622 

Iowa 4,780 

Kansas 2,724 

Kentucky 3,302 

Louisiana 2,546 

Maine 2,435 

Maryland 725 

Massachusetts 20, 317 

Michigan 9,328 

Minnesota 5,352 

Mississippi 915 

Missouri 8,439 

Montana 1,474 

Nebraska 1,754 

Nevada 203 

New  Hampshire 2,317 

New  Jersey 16,039 

New  York 46,233 

North  Carolina 868 

North  Dakota  221 

Ohio 21,050 

Oklahoma 276 

Oregon 1,979 

Pennsylvania 34,444 

Rhode  Island 4,537 

South  Carolina 616 

Tennessee 2, 512 

Texas 3,278 

Utah 930 

Vermont 1,403 

Virginia 2,170 

Washington 2,717 

West  Virginia 936 

Wisconsin _, .  4,997 

264,124 


Incan- 

Arc. 

Incan- 

descent. 

descent, 

36,275 

86 

1,300 

13,480 

25,850 

247 

.876 

355,490 

241 

3,900 

226,290 

15 

350 

134,538 

185 

5,500 

22,500 

18 

5,200 

16,600 

284 

10,900 

87,228 

352 

9,485 

10,660 

691,287 

5j,299 

38,669 

175,060 

2,004 

47,200 

232,290 

508 

40,995 

75,125 

378 

1,865 

102.297 

410 

500 

70,150 

7 

2,000 

102,525 

250 

6,000 

27,650 

76 

732,515 

2,027 

33,566 

383,695 

4,671 

68,750 

165,835 

748 

48,268 

20,800 

55 

3,300 

357,330 

1,113 

25,170 

74,225 

64 

1,555 

64.670 

199 

5,520 

3,5(10 

137,170 

427,221 

80 

7,266 

1,440,133 

1,223 

11,900 

36,355 

204 

8,507 

11,050 

131 

2,750 

488,937 

3,080 

55,742 

6.040 

49.595 

30 

775 

984,245 

2,363 

24,370 

122,668 

14,300 

179 

3,751 

92,100 

190 

6,490 

126,380 

673 

16,952 

28,100 

18 

700 

76,350 

81 

17,300 

42,325 

308 

1,763 

76,400 

713 

7,300 

53.590 

490 

167,370 

80 

3,456 

8,588,194 

8,905 

522,257 

30 


MUNICIPAL  OWNERSHIP  INCREASES  TAXES- 

In  Austin,  Texas,  before  the  municipal  plant  was 
established,  the  tax  rate  was  90  cents  on  SlUO,  now  it  is 
$2.30><  on  $100. 

Braintree,  Mass.,  tax  levy  in  1^'Jl  was  SlT.20  on 
$1,000,  now  it  is  S2(i.40. 

Chicopee,  Mass.,  levy  in  1897  was  $13.80  on  $1,000, 
now  it  is  $18. 

Middleborough.  Mass.,  tax  levy  in  ls9T  was  $16.60  on 
$1,000,  now  it  is  $20.65. 

Needham,  Mass.,  in  1897  was  $12.60  on  $1,000,  now 
it  is  $17. 

Peabody,  Mass.,  tax  levy  in  1897  was  $15  on  $1,000, 
now  it  is  $17.40. 

Reading,  Mass.,  levy  in  1897  was  $15.50  on  $1,000, 
now  it  is  $17.50. 

Paris,  Tenn.,  before  municipal  plant  was  installed, 
tax  rate  was  45  cents  on  $100,  now  it  is  $1  on  $100,  and 
no  sinking  fund  to  pa)'  bonds. 

Union  City,  Tenn.,  before  plant  was  purchased,  tax 
was  $1.10  on  $100,  now  it  is  $1.40,  and  this  does  not 
provide  a  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  and  they  had  to  levy  a 
special  tax  of  10  cents  on  $100  for  that  purpose. 

Humboldt,  Tenn.,  tax  rate  was  $1  on  $100,  now  it  is 
$1.50,  and  they  have  to  levy  a  special  tax  to  pay  bonds. 

Northfield,  Vt.,  before  municipal  plant  was  installed, 
tax  levy  was  30  cents  on  $1,  now  it  is  50  cents  on  $1. 


31 


REPORTS  OF  INVESTIGATING  COMMIT- 
TEES APPOINTED  BY  CITY  COUNCILS 
WORTHLESS  AND  UNRELIABLE. 

A  committee  from  Mobile  investigated  cost  of  lights 
at  Little  Rock,  and  reported  the  same  to  be  $51  pear  year, 
the  Scranton  committee  made  cost  $47,  while  Connorsville 
report  said  it  was  $42,  and  Steubenville  claimed  it  was 
$60,  and  Youngstown  went  them  one  better  and  called  it 
$69.83,  but  the  city  clerk  of  Little  Rock  reported  to  the 
mayor  that  lights  cost  $80.83  per  lamp  per  year. 


MUNICIPAL  PLANTS  IN  SMALL  PLACES. 

Nearly  all  municipal  plants  are  in  small  places  not 
large  enough  to  support  a  private  company  and  they  are 
compelled  to  install  a  municipal  plant  in  order  to  obtain 
the  light. 

There  is  only  one  plant  in  Arkansas  in  a  place  large 
enough  for  a  private  company,  one  in  California,  one  in 
Florida,  six  in  Illinois,  four  in  Indiana,  one  in  Iowa,  one 
in  Kansas,  one  in  Kentucky,  two  in  Maine,  three  in 
Massachusetts,  four  in  Michigan,  two  in  Missouri,  four  irt 
New  York,  six  in  Ohio,  four  in  Pennsylvania,  three  in 
Texas,  three  in  Virginia,  one  in  West  Virginia  ;  none  in 
Colorado,  Connecticut,  Delaware,  Georgia,  Louisiana, 
Maryland,  Minnesota,  Mississippi,  Montana,  Nebraska, 
New  Hampshire,  New  Jersey,  North  Carolina,  Oregon, 
South  Dakota,  Tennessee,  Utah,  Vermont,  Washington 
or  Wisconsin. 

It  appears  from  the  latest  reports  that,  of  the  325 
municipal  plants,  219  are  in  places  of  less  than  3,000 
population,  78  in  villages  between  3,000  and  10,000,  and 
only  38  in  the  entire  United  States  in  cities  of  over  10,000 
inhabitants. 

32 


VERY  FEW  MUNICIPAL   PLANTS  IN  CITIES 
WHERE  THERE  ARE  PRIVATE  PLANTS. 

An  examination  of  the  last  reports  of  municipal  plants 
discloses  the  fact  that  in  the  following  states  not  a  muni- 
cipal plant  is  operated  in  any  city  where  there  is  a  private 
plant:  Alabama.  Arizona,  Colorado,  Connecticut,  Dela- 
ware, Georgia,  Idaho,  Massachusetts,  Minnesota,  Mississ- 
ippi, Louisiana,  Montana,  Nevada,  New  Hampshire,  New 
Jersey,  New  Mexico,  North  Carolina,  North  Dakota, 
Oklahoma,  Oregon,  Rhode  Island,  South  Carolina,  South 
Dakota,  Tennessee,  Utah,  Vermont,  Wisconsin,  Wyoming; 
while  Arkansas  has  only  one,  California  one,  Illinois  six, 
Indiana  two,  Iowa  two,  Kansas  two,  Kentucky  two,  Maine 
two,  Maryland  one,  Michigan  five,  Missouri  one,  Nebraska 
one,  New  York  three,  Ohio  three,  Pennsylvania  three, 
Texas  three,  Virginia  one,  Washington  one,  West  Vir- 
ginia one. 


EXTRACTS    FROM    A   REPORT    MADE    TO 
THE  CITY  OF  BROOKLINE,  MASS. 

Wishing  to  secure  the  best  results,  the  mayor  em- 
ployed ex-mayor  Matthews,  of  Boston,  to  make  a  thorough 
investigation  of  the  two  systems  of  street  lighting,  viz.  : 
Municipal  ownership  and  contract  plan  with  private  com- 
pany.    His  report  is  as  follows : 

"  That  my  prices  are  higher  than  those  frequently  set 
up  by  theoretical  advocates  of  municipal  ownership  is  due, 
first,  to  the  very  general  omission  by  the  latter  of  adequate 
allowances  (when  any  are  made  at  all)  for  interest,  depre- 
ciation, insurance  and  taxes  ;  and,  secondly,  to  the  fact  that 

33 
(3) 


many,  in  fact,  nearly  all,  of  the  official  accounts  published 
by  municipal  corporations  of  the  operation  of  their  electric 
light  plants  fail  to  include  among  the  actual  expenses  of 
operation  many  items  which  should  properly  be  charged 
thereto,  such  as  general  office  or  administrative  expenses, 
rent,  salaries,  etc. 

"  I  simply  append  a  table,  prepared  by  me  with  the 
same  care  and  on  substantially  the  same  basis  as  the  esti- 
mates for  your  board,  of  the  actual  cost  of  arc  lights  in  some 
of  the  municipalities  commonly  cited  as  proof  of  the  ability 
of  the  public  to  operate  an  electric  light  plant  at  figures 
far  below  those  given  by  the  experts  employed  in  this 
investigation  ;  and  in  the  same  table,  in  a  parallel  column, 
will  be  found  the  annual  cost  of  these  same  plants  as 
claimed  with  wide  advertisement  throughout  the  country 
by  some  of  the  professional  advocates  of  municipal  owner- 
ship : 

TABLE    SHOWING    ALLEGED   AND    EEAL    ANNUAL    COST     PER     LAMP   OF     CER- 
TAIN   MUNICIPALITIES. 

Alleged 

,  annual  cost  Real  annual 

as  made  by  cost  as 

Town  or  City.  Number  the  advocates      found  by 

of  Candle       of  municipal       ex-mayor 

lights.         power.         ownership.       Matthews. 

*+Baiigor,  Me 150  2,000  $48  00  $79  00 

*tLewi8ton,  Me 100  2,000  55  00  65  50 

Peabody.  Mass 150  1,200  62  00  100  05 

Bay  City,  Mich 181  2,000  58  00  76  25 

tGoshen,  Ind 31  2,000  77  00  11154 

tBloomington,  111 240  2,000  5100     *         93  64 

Chicago,  111 1,100  2,000  96  00  18183 

Elgin,  111 98  2,000  43  00  100  73 

tAurora,  111 200  2,000  70  00  87  57 

tFairfield,  la 16  2,000  70  00  117  16 

*Ypsilanti,  Mich 88  2,000  36  00  77  84 

*rhese  ilants  are  run  by  water-power. 

tThese  plants  are  operated  in  connection  with  other  works. 

Brookline  made  contract  with  private  company  for 
lights. 

When  the  ten  year  contract  for  the  street  lights  in 
Boston  was  made,  mayor  Quincy  employed  ex-mayor 
Matthews  to  make  a  thorough  investigation,  and  the  con- 
tract was  based  upon  facts  disclosed  in  his  report. 

34 


COST    OF    LIGHTS   WHEN    FURNISHED  BY 
PRIVATE  COMPANIES. 

In  the  following  table  the  hours  run  are  the  exact 
time  lights  were  burned,  as  shown  by  the  station  records, 
and  the  yearly  basis  of  the  cost  per  hour  and  candle  power 
for  one  cent  are  the  same  as  recorded  on  the  books  of 
each  company. 

As  many  are  given  as  space  would  permit : 

Candle  power 

Cost  per  hotir 

Private  Company.                     Coal.       Hours  run.      per  hour.  for  one  cent. 

No.      1.     Michigan $2  25           4,000      $     .0195  615 

"         2.     Oregon. 1,500            .042  404 

3.  Michigan 2  15           1,500            .04  1,000 

4.  New  Jersey 3  25           2,000            .04  300 

"         5.     Pennsylvania....            GO           4,000            .0187  1,009 

"        6.     Kansas 1  90           2,100            .0314  636 

•'        7.     South  Carolina. . .     w.  p.             2,100            .0171  701 

"        8.     Wisconsin 4  25          4,000            .0162  987 

9.     Illinois 100           4,200            .0214  "934 

"       10.     Ohio 165           2,400            .0283  424 

"       11.     Georgia w.  p.           .4,500            .0155  1,290 

"       12.     Illinois 130          2,200            .0383  524 

"       13.    -Ohio 145           4,000            .0209  957 

"       14.     California 6  75           2,200            .043  465 

"       15.     Michigan w.  p.             4,000            .0118  1,695 

"      16.     New  York 2  15           4,000            .0189  634 

"      17.     Indiana 1  90          1,500            .046  434 

"       18.     Ohio 2  30           2,200            .0454  440 

"       19.     Montana 3  75           4,000            .03  666 

"       20.     Pennsylvania....         110           4,000            .02  1,000 

"       21.     Montana 2  00           4,000            .024  500 

"       22.     Pennsylvania....             66          4,000            .0175  1,142 

"       23.     Nebraska 3  00           4,300            .0293  682 

"      24.     California 2  50           4,000            .024  833 

25.     Pennsylvania  ....     n.   g.             4,000            .0162  925 

"      26.     Pennsylvania....     n.  G.             4,000            .0178  1,123 

"      27.     Illinois 150           1,403            .0296  405 

"      28.     Pennsylvania...           2  10           4,000            .024  833 

"       29.     Wisconsin 2  25           2,550            .0267  749 

30.     Illinois 65           2,170            .0345  579 

"      31.     New  York 2  10           4,300            .0229  873 

"      32.     Connecticut 3  00           4,000            .0237  506 

"      33.     Michigan w.  p.             4,500            .0155  774 

"       34.     Iowa 2  25           1,500            .04  500 

"      35.     Colorado 140           2,300            .0426  469 

"      36.     Tennessee 1  25           2,200            .0314  636 

"       37.     Indiana 75           2,200            .0272  735 


35 


Cost 

Private  Company.  Joal.       Hours  run.  per  hour. 

No.     38.  Wisconsin w.  p.  4,000  $.(.212 

39.  Tennessee $  1  65  4,000  .0217 

40.  West  Virginia....  90  2,200  .0327 

41..  New  Jersey 1  85  4,300  .0279 

42.  Tennessee 1  75  4,000  .024 

48.  New  Hampshire..  6  50  4,000  .0187 

44.  Georgia w.  p.  2,868  .0296 

45.  Ohio 150  4,000  .0162 

46.  Illinois 175  2,200  .0318 

47.  Iowa 1  25  3,000  .03 

48.  Indiana 180  4,000  .0187 

49.  Illinois 125  1,400  .0257 

50.  Pennsylvania....  135  4,000  .0192 

51.  Colorado 1  10  3,000  .04 

52.  Texas 3  35  4,200  .0257 

53.  South  Dakota....  3  50  4,500  .04 

54.  Connecticut 4  65  1,743  .04 

55.  Pennsylvania....  2  00  4,000  .018 

56.  Ohio...... 1  05  3,000  .0256 

57.  Ohio 167  3,674  .0217 

58.  Maine w.  p.  2,000  .0375 

59.  Indiana 2  40  4,000  .0168 

60.  Oregon 2  50  4,500  .024 

61.  Wisconsin 4  00  4,000  .0185 

62.  Ohio 190  4,000  .0206 

63.  Pennsylvania....  150  4,200  .0147 

64.  Indiana N.  G.  4,200  .02 

65.  New  York 2  25  .4,000  .02 

66.  West  Virginia....  1  40  4,000  .02 

67.  North  Dakota....  6  50  4,200  .0285 

68.  Indiana 2  10  4,000  .015 

69.  Ohio 1  70  4,000  .0225 

70.  Virginia w.  p.  2.000  .0375 

71.  Ohio 125  4,000  .0173 

72.  Indiana 1  60  4,000  .0225 

78.  New  York w.  p.  2, 200  .  0272 

74.  Connecticut 3  00  2,200  .05 

75.  North  Carolina. . .  3  35  2.500  .035 

76.  Ohio 3  00  3,600  .0234 

77.  Montana w.  p.  4,500  .024 

78.  Pennsylvania  ....  60  4,000  .02 

79.  Illinois 1  25  2, 100  .0342 

80.  Wisconsin 1  75  2,200  .034 

81.-  New  York 2  25  3,500  .0228 

82.  New  York 3  85  4,200  .0219 

88.  New  York 3  50  4,500  .0192 

84.  Alabama 1  75  4,000  .0225 

85.  Texas 3  00  4,000  .027 

86.  Michigan 2  65  1,500  .04 

87.  Texas 4  25  4,000  .03 

88.  Pennsylvania 2  00  4,200  .0196 

89.  Pennsylvania....  2  25  1,400  .0385 
90;  Michigan 2  75  4,000  .0225 

91.  West  Virginia....  1  00  4,000  .0225 

92.  West  Virginia....  2  50  2,200  .034 

93.  Ohio 1  65  2,200  .031)7 

94.  Michigan 2  50  1,500  .033 

95.  New  York 2  25  4,000  .0287 


Candle  cower 

per  hour 
for  one  cent. 

948 
921 
366 
716 
833 
641 
675 
740 
628 
666 

1,069 
467 

1,041 
500 
778 
500 
800 

1,111 
781 
921 
588 

1,190 
883 

1,081 
970 

1.360 

1,000 

600 

.  1,000 

701 

1,833 
888 
820 

1,156 
888 
735 
240 
342 
854 
833 

1,000 
584 
352 
886 
547 

1,041 
888 
740 
500 
666 

1,020 
519 
533 
888 
352 
507 
454 
843 


36 


Private  Company.  Coal.       Hours  run. 

No.     96.     North  Dakota $  5  25  1,500 

«'       97.     PennBylvania 1   30  4,000 

"       98.     Pennsylvania 100  4,200 

••       99.     New  York 3  95  4,000 

' '     100.     Wisconsin 3  65  4.000 

"     101.     Ohio 80  2,200 

♦'     102.     Iowa 188  2.586 

"     103.     Michigan 140  4,000 

"     104.     Ohio 1  80  4,200 

"     105.     Wisconsin 175  2.500 

"     106.     Indiana n.  g.  4,000 

'«     107.     New  York 2  86  4,000 

"     108.     Minnesota 3  50  4,000 

"     109.     New  York 2  85  4,000 

'  •     110.     Kentucky 1  25  4,000 

"     111.     Nebraska 2  25  4,000 

"     112.     Pennsylvania 2  10  4,200 

"     113.     New  Hampshire. .  w.  p.  3,650 

"     114.     New  York 2  05  4,000 

"     115.     Illinois 3  75  1,728 

"     116.     Indiana 1  50  4,000 

••     117.     Tennessee 2  25  4,200 

"     118.     Wisconsin 1  25  4.000 

«'    119.     Ohio 2  29  1,500 

*•     120.     Pennsylvania 115  4,400 

"     121.     Ohio 1  85  3,000 

"     122.     Connecticut 3  40  3,500 

"     123.     Alabama 2  90  4,000 

"    124.     Georgia 2  80  4,000 

"     125.     Wisconsin 4  00  4,000 

"     126.     Wisconsin 3  55  4.000 

"     127.     Wisconsin 3  00  2,150 

"     128.     Michigan 3  00  4,000 

•'     129.     Pennsylvania 175  4,000 

"     130.     Pennsylvania 2  55  1,400 

• '     131.     New  York 3  00  4, 000 

"     132.     Illinois 1  50  4,000 

-     133.     Ohio 1-75  4,000 

"     134.     Pennsylvania w.  p.  4,400 

*'     135.     Connecticut 3  60  3,300 

"     136.     California '..  w.  p.  4,000 

"     137.     New  Hampshire..  4  25  4,000 

"     138.     Pennsylvania 4,500 

"     139.     Pennsylvania 125  4,000 

"     140.     Tennessee 1  70  4,000 

"     141.     Virginia 2  41  4,000 

"    142     Wisconsin 3  50  2,200 

"     143.     Ohio 1  50  2,150 

"     144.     Maine 5  00  1,400 

'♦     145.     Khode  Island  ... .  300  4,000 

"     146.     Connecticut 3  00  4,000 

"     147.     Arkansas 3  45  4,200 

"     148.     Illinois 50  4.000 

"     149.     Colorado 0  75  2,900 

"     150.     Wisconsin 3  00  1,500 

"     151.     Wisconsin 3  00  3,500 

"     152.     Michigan 2  00  2,200 

-     153.     Texas 2  85  2,200 

37 


Candle  power 
per  hour 

Cost 

)r  hour. 

for  one  cent. 

.066 

307 

.015 

800 

.0178 

1,123 

.021 

571 

.015 

800 

.0272 

441 

.028 

714 

.0168 

1,190 

.0209 

956 

.028 

714 

.0175 

1,142 

.0214 

560 

.024 

833 

.0243 

823 

.02 

1.000 

.03 

666 

.0171 

1,169 

.0205 

585 

.0195 

1,025 

.0416 

480 

.02 

1,000 

.02 

1,000 

.025 

800 

.05 

400 

.0218 

917 

.028 

961 

.0285 

701 

.022 

909 

.025 

800 

.0225 

888 

.02 

600 

.03 

400 

.0175 

685 

.018 

1,111 

.033 

484 

.0179 

670 

.018 

1,111 

.0207 

966 

.0204 

980 

.0333 

600 

.021 

761 

.028 

428 

.0155 

1,290 

.0195 

1,025 

.0212 

943 

.0145 

827 

.0354 

338 

.0348 

574 

.0251 

478 

.0369 

542 

.0228 

526 

.0385 

529 

.0118 

1,111 

.033 

606 

.0366 

336 

.0191 

628 

.0318 

628 

.0318 

377 

Candle  power 

Cost  per  Lour 

Private  Company.  Coal.       Hours  run.  per  hour.        for  one  cent. 

No.  154.  Pennsylvania....  $      70  4,000  $.021  952 

"  155.  New  York 1  56  4,000  .0180  645 

"  156.  West  Virginia....  1  50  4,000  .0218  917 

"  157.  Pennsylvania....  100  4,000  .0187  1,069 

"  158.  Iowa 1  25  4,000  .02  1,000 

"  159.  Indiana N.  G.  4,700  .0175  1,142 

"  160.  New  York 2  90  4,200  .0173  1,150 

"  161.  New  York 2  45  4,400  .0236  847 

"  162.  Wisconsin 4  00  3,000  .028  428 

"  163.  North  Carolina. . .  3  12  4,000  .0186  645 

"  164.  Illinois 2  00  2,200  .0272  785 

"  165.  Minnesota 3  55  4,000  .0225  888 

"  166.  Wisconsin 2  75  3,000  .0193  621 

"  167.  Wisconsin 2  80  1,500-  .056  214 

'•  168.  Missouri 125  4,000  .02  1.000 

"  169.  New  York 2  10  4,000  .0227  881 

"  170.  Ohio 2  00  2,200  .0329  607 

"  171.  New  Jersey 3  00  4,000  .025  480 

"  172.  New  York 2  90  4,200  .02  1,000 

"  173.  Colorado... 8  00  4,000  .0252  793 

"  174.  Washington 2  50  4,000  .024  833 

"  175.  Minnesota w.  p.  4,000  .0187  1,069 

"  176.  Colorado 8  00  2,200  .0545  366 

"  177.  Texas 1  60  3,000  .03  666 

"  178.  Colorado 3  50  2,200  .0485  412 

"  179.  Utah 2  50  4,200  .0171  1,169 

"  180.  Pennsylvania....  170  4,000  .019  1,052 

"  181.  Wisconsin 3  00  4,000  .0237  843 

"  182.  Tennessee 2  00  4,500  .0213  938 

"  183.  Pennsylvania 1  35  4,000  .0162  1,234 

"  184.  Georgia 2  60  2,250  .032  628 

"  185.  Ohio 2  10  4,000  .0222  900 

"  186.  Alabama 2  20  3,000  .03  666 

"  187.  Ohio 2  00  4,000  .0218  917 

"  188.  Pennsylvania 2  80  4,000  .0187  641 

"  189.  Michigan 150  2,200  .0318  377 

"  190.  Connecticut 3  17  4,500  .0266  451 

"  191.  Pennsylvania....  175.  4,000  .0187  1,078 

"  192.  Iowa. 2  25  1,800  .036  333 

"  193.  Michigan 2  50  4,000  .0145  862 

"  194.  Michigan w.  p.  1,500  .044  454 

"  195.  Pennsylvania....  140  3,000  .02  1,000 

"  196.  Indiana 1  10  4,000  .0187  1,069 

"  197.  New  Jersey 3  00  4,000  .0246  813 

"  198.  New  York 3  25  4,500  .0222  540 

"  199.  Mississippi 2  95  2.000  .05  500 

"  200.  Ohio 2  35  2,300  .0352  568 

"  201.  Washington 5  00  3,800  .0263  456 

"  202.  Wisconsin 1  25  4,200  .0328  607 

"  203.  Iowa 1  40  2,200  .0327  366 

"  204  New  York 2  00  2,000  .033  606 

"  205.  Minnesota 4  00  2,300  .0365  328 

"  206.  Texas  2  50  4,500  .0266  751 

"  207.  Delaware 2  45  4,000  .025  800 

"  208.  Pennsylvania....  2  20  3,700  .03  666 

"  209.  Pennsylvania 1  05  4,000  .019  1,052 

"  210.  Ohio 140  2,800  .0214  934 

"  211.  Iowa 1  80  .2,200  .03  400 

38 


Private  Company.  .Coal. 

No.  212.  Wisconsiu $  2  UO 

''     218.  Peuusylvauia n.  g. 

"     214.  Pennsylvania 85 

"     215.  Wisconsin 

"     216.  Ohio 1  60 

"     217.  Rhode  Islaua  ... .  31)0 

"     218.  Connecticut 4  00 

♦•     219.  New  York w.  p. 

"     220.  Ohio 80 

'•     221.  Nebraska 2  55 

'     222.  Ohio 1  40 


Candle  power 

Co.st 

per  hour 

Hours  run. 

per  hour. 

for  one  cent. 

4,000 

$  .02 

1.000 

4,000 

.0218 

550 

4.000 

.016 

1,251 

4,000 

.02 

1,000 

4,000 

.02 

1,000 

1.500 

.05 

240 

4,000 

.025 

480 

4,000 

,0182 

1.0'.)8 

2,000 

.0367 

544 

1.500 

.08 

250 

2,300 

.0278 

719 

MUNICIPAL  PLANTS  AND  THE  COST  OF  LIGHTS 
PER  HOUR,  AND  CANDLE  POWER  PER  HOUR 
FURNISHED  FOR  ONE  CENT. 

In  the  following  table  the  candle  power  of  lamps  and 
the  hours  burned  are  the  actual  time,  in  each  case,  that 
lights  were  operated,  as  shown  by  the  city  records. 

Reducing  the  time  in  each  place  to  the  actual  hours 
lights  were  burned,  and  the  cost  per  hour,  with  the  candle 
power  per  hour  furnished  for  one  cent,  places  each  upon 
the  same  basis,  and  shows  the  true  cost  of  lights,  also  the 
returns  cities  are  receiving  for  the  money  paid,  and  it  is 
immaterial  whether  they  are  using  1,200  or  2,000  candle 
power  lamps. 

This  is  the  only  true  method  of  comparison. 

Candle  power 
City.  Cost  Cost  per  hour 

of  coal.      Hours  run.       per  hour.       for  one  cent 

Abiogdon,  Va S3  00  4,000     $    .027  592 

Ames;  la 155  1,500  .0836  239 

Atkin,  Minn 2,000  .035  342 

Athens,  Ahi  2  00  1.200  .0233  686 

Anderson,  Ind n.  g.  2,000  .0222  900 

Adrian.  Mich 1,500  ,0086  174 

Arlington,  Minn 1,200  .0895  134 

Allesheuy.Pa 100  3,976  .0197  1,010 

Aurora,  111 175  2,500  ,031  645 

Ashtabula.  Ohio 2  05  2,000  .0568  352 

Alexandria,  Va 3,750  .0195  769 

39 


Candle  power 

City.                               Cost  Cost               per  hour 

of  coal.  Hours  run.  per  hour.       for  one  cent. 

Alexandria,  Minn 1,500  $.0828  241 

Atlantic,  la $150  2,200  .0518  386 

Atlantic  Highlands,  N.J 2,000  .0375  533 

Bay  City,  Mich 150  2,000  .0261  766 

Bellevue,  Iowa 3,800     '  .0212  566 

Bloomington,  111 195  2,555  .  0366  540 

Bethany,  Mo 3  00  2,200  .0397  302 

Belmont,  Mass 1,478  .0812  147 

Braintree,  Mass 2,300  .039  807 

Batavia,  N.  Y 177  3,600  .0213  938 

Bangor,  Me w.  p.  4,000  .0152  789 

Bowling  Green,  Ky 128  2,200  .0387  516 

Blue  Island,  111 1,875  .0451  443 

Carthage,  Ohio »     2  00  3,000  .0288  694 

Clyde,  Ohio 1  76  1,500  .057  350 

Columbus,  Ind 150  2,000  .0334  598 

Catawissa,  Pa 100  4,000  .0189  1,058 

Chariton.Ia 125  2.500  .0527  227 

Chicago,  111 2  50  4,000  .0235  851 

Council  Grove,  Kan 1,875  .0779  154 

Conneaut,  Ohio 2,000  .0245  489 

Chambersburg,  Pa 4,000  .023  869 

Columbia  City,  Ind 2  10  3,000  .0339  589 

Chicopee,  Mass 3,000  .0365  328 

Decatur,  111 125  2,100  .035  571 

Danvers,  Mass 1,742  .032  375 

Danville,  Va 4,000  .0155  774 

Dawson,  Ga 2  80  2,000  .0464  258 

Dunkirk,  N.Y 130  3,000  .0263  760 

Elberton,  Ga w.  p.  2,000  .035  343 

Elgin,  111  2  00  2,500  .0316  633 

Emons,  Pa 2,190  .0511  391 

Estherville,  la 2  50  1,500  .0271  443 

Easton,  Pa 3,800  .0307  651 

Fremont,  Neb 3  35  2,000  .0278  431 

Fayette,  Mo 2  00  1,500  .086  333 

Fairfield,  la 2  25  1,954  .052  384 

Fulton,Mo 175  3,000  .039  513 

Fort  Worth,  Tex 3  10  2,000  .0364  329 

Fredonia,  N.  Y 2  00  1,500  .0384  520 

Frederick,  Md 2  50  2,200  .0443  451 

Granville,  Ohio 1  25  1,320  .0454  '    440 

Grandledge,  Mich 1, 460  .11  181 

Greenwich,  Ohio 135  1,500  .0664  301 

Galveston,  Tex 5  00  3,000  .034  588 

Greenfield,  Ind 1,500  .05  400 

Griffin,  Ga 2,200  .0343  583 

Goshen,  Ind 2  95  2,400  .0246  813 

Henderson.  Minn 4  00     .0333  240 

Hingham,  Mass 1,560  .0479  350 

Hannibal,  Mo 155  2,500  .0458  436 

40 


City.  Cost 

of  coal.  Hours  run. 

Hudson,  Mass 1 ,653 

Huntington,  lud y.lDO 

Hubbard,  Ohio 8  1  65  1,260 

Henderson,  Ky 75  2,000 

Hamilton,  N.  Y 3  10  2,200 

Higprinsville,  Mo 180  1,500 

Herriugton,  Kan 1,825 

Holland,  Mich 2,000 

Herkimer,  N.  Y 2  50  3,294 

High  Point,  X.C 4  10  1,500 

Jacksonville,  ria 4,000 

Jackson,  Ohio 2,000 

Jacksonville,  111 1  74  2,000 

Jamestown,  N.  Y 1  45  4,000 

Kalamazoo,  Mich 2  45  3,000 

Kendallville,  Ind 2  25  2,000 

Lowell,  Mich w.  p.  1,500 

Lisbon.  la 2  50  1,500 

Logausport,  lud n.  g.  4,000 

Lewiston,  Me w.  p.  4,000 

Lansing,  Mich 2  25  4,000 

Miamisburg,  Ohio 1  72  2,000 

Marseilles,  111 w.  p.  3,500 

Montpelier,  Ohio 2  50  1,500 

Mattoon,  111 75  2,000 

Mishawaska,  Ind 1  98  2,200 

Muncie   Ind 2  65  3,200 

Meadville,  Pa 2  16  3,500 

Marietta,  Ohio N.   G.  4,0i)0 

Martin's  Ferry,  Ohio 61  3,000 

Marshall,  Mich w.  p.  2,000 

Mount  Pleasant,  la 1  95  2,000 

Marblehead,  Mass S.OOO 

Middleborough,  Mass 1,272 

Madisonville,  Ohio 185  1,500 

Marion,  Ind n.  g.  2,000 

Morgan  Park.  111.    1  85  1,400 

Marquette,  Mich w.  p.  4,000 

Morrisville,  Vt w.  p.  1,500 

North  East,  Pa 195  1,500 

Newbury,  S.  C 3  35  2,000 

Ortonville,  Minn 6  00  2,000 

Ovid,  Mich 2  06  1 ,500 

Osage  City,  Kan 1  90  1 ,500 

Oxford,  Ohio 2  60  1,500 

Painesville,  Ohio 2  15  2,000 

Portland,  Mich w.  p.  1,500 

Paducah,  Ky 1  00  3,000 

Paris,  111 2  25  3,000 

Paw  Paw,  Mich w.  p.  1,400 

Plain  City,  Ohio 2  00  1,500 

41 


Candle  power 


Cost 

per  hour 

per  hour. 

for  one  con 

.0799 

250 

;  .0491 

408 

.038 

526 

.0311 

643 

.044 

272 

.0444 

270 

.14 

136 

.0416 

480 

.0256 

7^1 

.0302 

397 

.0233 

858 

.0375 

533 

.027 

740 

.0229 

524 

.0295 

077 

.022 

909 

.043 

431 

.032 

625 

.024 

833 

.0178 

674 

.0253 

790 

.0395 

506 

.0148 

1,351 

.0465 

430 

.0297 

673 

.05 

400 

.0209 

956 

.02 

1,000 

.0213 

938 

.0285 

701 

.0404 

495 

.0161 

496 

.0229 

089 

.08 

150 

.0378 

317 

.0281 

711 

.03 

666 

.0263 

700 

.0809 

247 

.04 

500 

.035 

571 

.0092 

289 

.0688 

290 

.0355 

563 

.051 

392 

.0353 

566 

.03 

400 

.0316 

632 

.0173 

693 

.0289 

553 

.0422 

473 

City.  Cost 

of  coal.  Hours  run. 

Pawnee  City,  Neb $3  25  1,500 

Quitman,  Ga 150  2,000 

Quakertown,  Pa 3  10  3,000 

Eock  Falls,  111 3,000 

Eochelle,  111 3  15  1,200 

Beading,  Mass 3,533 

Rensselaer,  Ind 1  95  3, 000 

Rnshville,  Ind 3,190 

St.  Clair,  Pa 100  2,000 

South  Boston,  Va 1,500 

Salem,  Va 81  1,500 

St.  Peters,  Minn 3  15  1,500 

Sherman.  Tex 2  50  4,000 

Springville,  N.  Y w.  p.  4,000 

Shelby,  Ohio 1  85  2.000 

Statesville,  N.  C 150  2,000 

Somerville,  Tenn 2  65  1,500 

St.  Charles,  Mo 185  2,000 

South  Norwalk,  Conn 1,900 

Stanton,  111 58  2,000 

Smyrna,  Del 2  35  2,300 

Shelby,  Mich 2  10  1,500 

Shickshinny,  Pa 85  2,200 

Santa  Clara,  Cal 3  30  1,200 

St.  Joseph,  Mo 1  20  2,200 

Swanton,  Vt w,  p.  3,000 

Salem,  111 150  i,500 

Santa  Cruz,  Cal 1,500 

Taunton.  Mass 2,144 

Titusville.  Pa n.  g.  3,500 

Topeka,  Kan 3  00  3,000 

Tarentum,  Pa 150  4,000 

Vinton,  la 188  1,800 

Wheeling,  W.  Va 1  09  4,000 

Westfield,  N.  Y 2  10  3,120 

Waseca,  Minn 3  85  1,500 

Wakefield,  Mass 1,365 

Williston,  Ohio 80  3, 000 

Winterset,  la 1,400 

Watervliet,  N.  Y '    4,000 

Ypsilanti,  Mich w.  p.  1,900 


Candle  power 

Cost 

per  hour 

per  hour. 

for  one  cent. 

;  .0543 

368 

.0484 

413 

.035 

47a 

.0416 

480 

.0416 

480 

.0354 

338 

.0443 

2"70 

.0750 

366 

.0365 

563 

.0467 

256 

.0376 

31» 

.0476 

420 

.0311 

948 

.0155 

1,390 

.0409 

488 

.0466 

257 

.0438 

456 

.0393 

508 

.0476 

394 

.034 

588 

.043 

283 

.0333 

360' 

.035 

571 

.0549 

364 

.039 

513 

.058 

344 

.0393 

682 

.0733 

373 

.034 

353 

.0157 

1,273 

.0335 

597 

.0239 

502 

.0286 

409 

.0225 

80O 

.0164 

1,219 

.0507 

394 

.06 

200 

.0318 

377 

.0335 

358 

.0247 

809 

.0273 


733 


42 


CORRECT  COMPARISON  OF  LIGHTS. 

The  cost  per  year  of  a  lamp  is  not  a  correct  or  proper 
basis  for  ascertaining  the  cost  of  lights. 

The  fact  that  the  yearly  cost  of  a  lamp  is  low  is  no 
criterion  that  the  light  is  cheap. 

One  plant  may  burn  a  1,200  candle  power  lamp  a  few 
hours  per  night  during  certain  nights  each  month,  while 
another  plant  burns  a  2,000  candle  power  lamp  all  night 
every  night. 

As  an  illustration,  compare  Hubbard,  Ohio,  where  the 
yearly  cost  is  S48  per  lamp,  but  they  were  burned  only 
1,260  hours  per  year,  and  when  the  cost  per  hour  is 
calculated  it  is  .038  cents  per  hour,  and  the  candle  power 
per  hour  furnished  for  one  cent  is  526,  while  at  Chambers- 
burg,  Pa.,  the  annual  cost  is  S92,  but  the  lights  are  burned 
4,000  hours  per  year,  and  the  cost  per  hour  is  only  .023 
cents,  and  the  candle  power  per  hour  furnished  for  one 
cent  is  869,  showing  that,  notwithstanding  the.  annual 
rate  at  Chambersburg  is  nearly  twice  as  much  as  at  Hub- 
bard, the  cost  per  hour  is  .015  cents  less,  and  they  furnish 
343  more  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 


AVERAGE  COST  IN  PRIVATE  AND  PUBLIC  PLANTS. 

An  examination  of  the  reports  discloses  the  fact  that 
private  companies,  on  an  average,  furnish  the  lights  for 
3,380  hours  per  year,  while  the  municipal  plants  average 
2,307  hours  per  year. 

Showing  that  the  private  companies  furnish  the  lights 
for  1,073  more  hours  per  year  than  the  municipal  plants. 

The  cost  per  hour  in  the  municipal   plants  average 

43 


.0397  cents  per  hour,   and  with  private  companies  cost  is 
.0264  cents  per  hour,  being  .0133  cents  per  hour  less. 

Also,  that  private  companies  furnish,  on  an  average, 
750  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent,  and  the  munici- 
pal plants  528  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent.  There- 
fore, municipalities,  who  contract  with  private  companies, 
receive  222  more  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent  than 
is  produced  in  the  municipal  plants. 


COST  WHEN  TRUE  ACCOUNTS  ARE  RENDERED. 

Scores  of  statements  have  been  made  by  the  advo- 
cates of  municipal  ownership,  showing  that  the  total 
cost,  in  certain  cities,  of  an  arc  light,  where  city  owned 
the  plant,  was  from  $25  to  $50  per  year. 

Yet,  when  the  gas  and  electric  light  commissioners  of 
Massachusetts,  who  are  furnished  with  sworn  statements 
of  the  municipal  plants,  and  then  send  an  expert  to  ex- 
amine their  books  and  verify  the  costs,  and  find  that  the 
average,  of  all  the  municipal  plants  in  the  state  using 
1,200  candle  power  arc  lights,  is  $99.45,  only  burned 
2,148  hours  per  year.  How  are  these  advocates  of  mu- 
nicipal ownership  to  explain  the  reason  for  this  great 
difference  in  the  cost  in  Massachusetts  and  the  plants 
which  they  quote.  Of  course,  there  can  be  but  one  rea- 
son.given  in  Massachusetts,  the  true  facts  and  actual  cost 
is  shown,  while  in  the  cases  repoited  by  these  advocl-tes 
in  other  cities,  they  simply  give  a  part  of  the  operating 
expenses,  and  the  rest  are  charged  to  other  departments, 
and  interest,  depreciation,  taxes,  and  sinking  fund,  are 
entirely  ignored,  as  is  shown  in  the  report  of  Chief 
Walker  of  Philadelphia,  when  he  reported  cost  of  opera- 
ting   a    municipal    plant : 

Made  no  charge  for  the  services  of  a  superintendent. 

44 


No  provision  for  a  machinist. 
No  charge  for  the  removal  of  ashes. 
No  charge  in  the  cost  of  maintenance  for  repairs  to 
engines,  boilers,  dynamos,  lamps,  etc. 

No  charge  for  the  use  of  a  horse  and  wagon. 

No  provision  for  insurance. 

No  charge  for  water  that  would  be  consumed. 

No  provision  for  repairs  to  real  estate. 

No  charge  for  lost  taxes. 

No  charge  for  interest. 


AN  ECONOMIC  TRUTH. 

In  the  reports  made  of  all  municipal  plants  in  Mass- 
achusetts, the  cost  per  lamp  per  year,  hours  burned, 
candle  power,  interest,  depreciation,  etc.,  are  taken  from 
the  report  of  the  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Commissioners, 
and  made  up  by  the  commission.  Therefore,  there  can 
be  no  question  as  to  their  accuracy. 

In  Massachusetts,  the  real  condition  and  results  are 
shown,  and  all  the  facts  revealed,  and  the  commissioners  of 
the  state  vouch  for  their  truthfulness.  The  municipal 
plants  in  that  state  are  as  well  equipped  as  any  in  the 
country,  and  can  produce  the  lights  at  as  low  a  rate  as 
any.  If  the  taxes  were  added,  it  would  make  a  still  more 
unfavorable  showing  for  the  municipal  plants.  That  the 
economic  truth  involved  in  this  condition  of  municipal 
ownership  is  beginning  to  be  recognized  and  understood 
S3ems  to  be  indicated  by  the  adverse  action  taken  during 
the  past  year  by  tax  payers  in  a  number  of  Massachusetts 
towns. 

45 


COMPARATIVE    COST     OF     INCANDESCENTS,    AS 
SHOWN  BY  MASSACHUSETTS  REPORTS. 

The  Massachusetts  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Commis- 
sioners' report  shows  that  the  cost  per  year  of  25  candle 
power  street  incandescent  lamps  was  $14.75,  for  one  town 
$22.88,  for  two  others,  $25.62  and  $30.28,  respectively. 
The  same  report  shows  that  private  companies  are  charg- 
ing for  the  same  class  of  lamps  from  $12  to  $16  per  year. 

These  figures  for  municipal  plants  do  not  include 
taxes,  if  they  were  added  it  would  make  the  comparison 
still  more  unfavorable.  One  would  expect  as  good  results 
in  Massachusetts  as  in  any  state,  but  the  result  shows  that 
the  cost  of  public  lighting  exceeds  what  it  would  be  under 
private  ownership. 

The  same  report'  shows  that  the  operating  expenses 
for  1899  of  the  municipal  electric  plants  were  $14,190.75 
more  than  they  were  the  year  previous,  while  the  receipts 
only  increased  $7,103.24. 

Be]jnont  burned  25  candle  power  incandescents  5.5 
hours  per  night  for  22.4  nights  per  month,  at  a  cost  of 
$30.28  per  year  per  lamp,  and  charged  private  parties 
20  cents  per  kilowatt  for  incandescents,  and  customers  pay 
for  renewals. 

Braintree  burned  25  candle  power  incandescents  7.7 
hours  per  night  for  24.8  nights  per  month,  at  a  cost  of 
$22.48  per  lamp  per  year,  and  charge  to  private  customers 
for  incandescent  lights  was  6  mills  per  ampere  hour. 
Customers  pay  for  renewals. 

Hudson  burned  25  candle  power  incandescents  4.8 
hours  per  night  for  28.7  nights  per  month,  at  a  cost  of 
$22.88  per  year,  and  charged  for  incandescent  lights  20 
cents  per  kilowatt.     Customers  pay  for  renewals. 

Middleborough  burned  25  candle  power  incandescents 
4.4  hours  per  night  for  24.1  nights  per  month,  at  a  cost  of 
$25.62  per,  year  per  lamp,  and  charge  to  private  customers 
was  15  cents  per  kilowatt.  Customers  pay  25  per  cent 
above  cost  for  renewals. 

46 


EXPERIENCE  OF  MUNICIPALITIES  WHO  OWN 
PLANTS. 

MUNCIE,  Ind.  The  superintendent  saiys  that  as  a  general  rule  they 
are  unsatisfactorj'. 

METROPOLIS,  111.  Superintendent  says  municipal  plants  are  not 
as  economical  as  thej-  should  be  and  are  not  managed  as  they  should  be. 
It  seems  as  though  there  is  no  one  to  go  ahead  and  carry  out  things. 

HERRINGTON,  Kan.  Superintendent  says  a  good  man  cannot  do 
much  in  ii  year. 

WELLS,  Minn.  Superintendent  says  :  I  do  not  believe  in  muni- 
cipal ownership  of  electric  plants,  as  too  much  political  influence  is 
brought  to  bear  on  it,  and  the  plant  suffers  from  it  both  as  to  manage- 
ment and  economy. 

HOLLAND,  Mich.  President  says  :  I  am  inclined  to  the  opinion 
that  there  would  be  a  chance  for  corruption  and  appointment  of  favorites 
and  for  political  iutiuence. 

JACKSON,  Ohio.  Superintendent  says  :  This  plant  is  run  bj'  a 
committee  from  the  council  which  is  changed  every  3'ear,  so  we  get  new 
management  every  year  that  does  not  become  acquainted  with  the  work 
until  changed  ;  the  attention  is  not  paid  to  details  as  would  be  by  a 
private  company. 

OXFORD,  Ohio.  City  trustee  says  :  We  believe  that  they  can  be 
operated  in  towns  saj'  of  3,000  people,  but  not  in  larger  on  account  of 
political  aftairs  being  so  often  mixed  up  with  them. 

DeGRAFF,  Ohio.  Manager  says:  A  committee  of  the  council 
in  nine  cases  out  of  ten  will  put  their  judgment  up  against  a  man  of  years 
of  experience  in  the  management  of  plants. 

WILMINGTON,  Ohio.  Superintendent  saj-s  :  In  my  experience 
no  plant  should  be  run  l)y  any  municipal  corporation,  for  there  are  so 
many  that  want  to.be  boss,  and  too  manj-  free  lights. 

GRAND  HAVEN,  Mich.  The  board  and  council  have  quarreled 
over  the  city  electrician,  who  has  resigned  ;  the  board  accuses  the 
council  of  desiring  to  put  men  in  charge  of  the  electric  light  plant  who 
are  related  to  certain  aldermen.  The  council  accuses  the  board  of 
creating  liabilitj'  without  reference  to  the  city  council,  and  have  ordered 
the  treasurer  to  pay  no  bills  unless  approved  by  the  council. 

dUAKERTOWN,  Pa.  Superintendent  saj-s  municipal  electric 
plants  would  be  a  success  if  politics  could  be  kept  away  from  them. 

47 


An  official  of 

C0NNEAT7T,  Ohio,  sa3'S  :  "When  some  saloon  keeper,  shoemaker 
or  baker,  who,  by  his  affiliation  with  some  organization,  is  elected  to 
office  and  is  allowed  to  manage  an  electric  light  plant,  municipal  owner- 
ship can  hardly  help  being  a  failure.  All  the  conditions  are  unfavorable, 
owing  to  the  miserable  political  system  of  the  country. 

One  of  the  officials  of 

GOODLAND,  Ind.,  writes:  Dear  Sir:  This  is  a  municipal  light- 
ing plant,  and  having  to  pass  each  year  from  bad  hajids  to  worse  in  the 
matter  of  trustees,  the  plant  has  never  paid  a  dollar,  but  is  running  in 
debt  constantly,  as  nearly  every  such  plant  is  doing. 

Yours  truly. 

Dear  Sir  : 

I  have  just  taken  charge  of  the  plant  here,  and  they  hav'n't  taken 
record  of  anything,  run  it  just  as  they  could.  The  engineer  let  things 
run  down  so  that  they  were  just  about  ready  to  shut  down.  I  have  been 
working  at  it  day  and  night,  got  it  so  it  runs  very  well  now. 

Yours  truly. 

Dear  Sir  : 

The  mayor  and  all  councilmen,  city  clerk  and  all  citizens  of  the  city 
try  to  run  the  plant.  The  water  works  and  electric  lights  are  run 
together.  As  the  mayor  and  committee,  with  the  assistance  of  a  leather- 
headed  clerk,  all  dictate  what  shall  be  done  and  where  supplies  shall  be 
bought,  I,  therefore,  have  no  report  to  make.  With  eight  years'  experi- 
ence, I  would  advise  all  towns  to  hire  their  lights,  which  is  by  far  the 
cheapest.  I  am  not  in  favor  of  any  city  or  town  owning  an  electric  light 
plant. 

Yours  truly. 

CHARLOTTE,  N.  Y. ,  has  a  municipal  plant.  George  W.  Euggles,^ 
ex-president  of  the  village,  and  a  trustee  for  many  years,  says  :  "Muni- 
cipal affairs  here  are  in  a  terrible  condition.  The  water  works  and 
electric  light  plants  have  been  terribly  mismanaged  by  village  officials. 
I  do  not  think  the  water  system  will  be  a  success.  We  will  not  get  any 
water  from  it.  If  we  do,  the  supply  will  be  very  scant,  and  will  be 
polluted  by  drainage  from  Greenleaf's  farm  barn-yards  and  outhouses, 
and  the  filth  from  the  power  house.  Even  if  enough  water  should  run 
into  the  receiving  pipes,  it  would  be  contaminated  by  the  sewage  carried 
down  the  river  from  the  city  of  Rochester.  The  substance  of  the  whole 
matter  is  that  we  have  expended  more  than  $75,000  for  village  improve- 
ments, electric  light,  water  works  and  sewer.  We  have  a  sewer,  which  is 
of  no  use  without  water  works.  We  have  no  water,  and  are  not  likely  to 
get  any,  and  we  have  a  few  feeble  electric  lights.  Last  night,  one  of  the 
brick  arches  under  the  boiler  in  the  power  house,  for  the  second  time^ 
caved  in,  and  nearly  all  the  town  was  in  darkness." 

48 


MUNICIPAL  MANAGEMENT. 

NEWARK,  Ohio,  has  a  plant,  and  at  a  meeting  of  the  city  council 
the  president  said :  "  They  were  having  the  worst  service  in  the  history 
of  the  plant.  Several  men  were  employed  therein  whose  habits  were  so 
bad  that  for  several  days  following  each  pay-day  they  were  incapacitated 
for  good  performance  of  their  duties.  Many  lamps  throughout  the  city 
gave  no  light,  because  they  were  carelessly  or  improperly  handled,  and 
the  time  was  not  far  distant  when  the  city  must  incur  a  heavy  expense  to 
put  the  plant  in  shape."  The  Newark,  Ohio,  American  says:  "  If  the 
city  authorities  have  in  vievr  the  utter  and  complete  destruction  of  our 
electric  light  plant,  they  are  certainly  pursuing  the  right  course  to 
accomplish  that  end." 

WYANDOTTE,  Mich.  At  a  council  meeting,  charges  were  freely 
made  against  members  of  the  board  and  the  employes  of  the  lighting 
plant.  The  mayor  stated  :  "  That  accidents  had  occurred  to  the  public 
lighting  plant  of  the  city  in  the  last  few  months,  and  charges  had  been 
made  by  numerous  citizens  as  to  extravagance,  incompetence  and  flagrant 
neglect  on  the  part  of  employes.  These  had  become  so  fre(iuent  that  he 
had  hardly  been  able  to  attend  to  business  on  account  of  such  complaints. 
Also,  the  operation  of  the  plant  was  becoming  more  and  more  costly  each 
month." 

ONAWA,  Iowa,  has  a  municipal  plant,  and  for  the  past  eight  years 
the  service  has  been  very  poor,  resulting  in  many  business  men  putting 
in  i:)lants  of  their  own.  The  council  claims  that  the  management  is  to 
blame,  and  the  management  say  the  council  interferes  with  the  business, 
and  so  it  goes.  No  head,  and  a  lot  of  politicians  running  the  business, 
and  the  tax  payers  paying  for  the  loss  sustained. 

GRAND  HAVEN,  Mich.  The  city  has  been  operating  its  electric 
light  plant  under  the  control  of  the  board  of  public  works,  subject  to  the 
approval  of  the  council.  The  board  and  council  have  quarreled  over  the 
city  electrician,  Avho  has  resigned.  Another  was  elected.  The  board 
accuses  the  council  of  desiring  to  put  men  in  charge  of  the  electric  light 
plant  who  are  related  to  certain  aldermen.  The  council  accuse  the  board 
of  trying  to  create  liability  without  reference  to  the  council,  and  have 
instructed  the  city  treasurer  to  paj'^  no  bills  not  approved  by  the  council. 
Meantime,  the  spring  elections  are  anticipated,  and.  merry  times  are 
promised. 


49 

(4) 


FACTS  DISCLOSED  BY  CITY  OFFICIALS. 

The  following  extract  from  the  report  of  the  chairman 
of  the  electric  lighting  committee  of  the  city  of  Memphis, 
Tenn.,  who  were  negotiating  and  made  a  contract  with 
the  local  comipany  for  35  years,  discloses  some  pertinent 
truths  regarding  municipal  ownership  : 

In  pursuing  my  investigations  concerning  this  subject,  I  did  not  over- 
look cities  owning  electrical  plants,  on  the  other  hand  I  did  my  utmost  to 
obtain  from  such  cities  full  and  true  reports  relative  to  the  actual  cost  of 
both  arc  and  incandescent  lighting,  some  of  them  replied,  but  the 
majority  failed  to  furnish  me  with  the  desired  information. 

Those  who  did  favor  me,  I  regret  to  say,  did  so  with  reports  that, 
upon  outside  investigation  and  from  expert  testimony,  I  find  are  totally 
unreliable,  failing  to  give  the  true  costs,  merely  publishing  what  I  would 
term  "  political"  figures. 

For  instance,  the  last  published  cost  of  an  arc  light  in  Allegheny, 
Pa.,  was  $47.35  per  annum,  which  was  really  the  cash  cost,  making  no 
allowance  for  interest,  depreciation,  taxes  lost,  or  water  consumed. 
However,  in  their  annual  report  of  bureau  of  lighting  of  1900,  they  tell 
the  public  that,  after  allowing  four  per  cent  interest,  five  per  cent  depre- 
ciation, and  a  certain  amount  for  taxes,  their  arc  lights  cost  them  $71.17, 
which  is  in  itself,  according  to  other  statistics,  too  low.  They  give  their 
depreciation  at  five  per  cent.,  or  $12.04  per  arc  lamp,  when,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  and  upon  investigations  made  by  a  committee  appointed  by  congress 
and  ten  different  cities,  the  actual  depreciation  should  be  ten  per  cent. , 
or,  instead  of  charging  $12.04  per  lamp,  the  city  of  Allegheny  should 
charge  $24.08,  and  publish  its  cost  per  arc  lamp  per  annum  at  $83.21. 
Even  this  figure  is  disputed,  experts  claiming  it  too  low. 

The  city  of  Chicago  reports  its  cost  per  arc  lamp  per  annum  at  $55.93, 
and  admits  no  interest  is  charged  on  plant. 

It  might  as  well  admit  several  other  things  which  it  does  not.  for  the 
management  of  this  concern  has  been  anything  but  creditable  to  the  city  of 
Chicago,  and  the  facts  in  the  case  are  that  when  the  lights  are  charged 
properly,  and  without  any  subterfuge  being  resorted  to,  the  cost  will  be 
seen  to  be  nearer  $150  per  annum  per  light  than  what  is  published. 

It  is  a  very  significant  condition  of  affairs  when  a  city  publishes 
$55.93  per  arc  light,  then  immediately  after  lets  a  contract  for  over  500 
lights  at  $103,  under  the  excuse  that  they  do  it  rather  than  increase  their 
present  plant.      It  seems  to  me  that,  if  they  can  produce  lights  as  cheap 

60 


as  cliiimed,  they  would  certainly  build  a  uew  or  exteud  tlu'  old  plant, 
when  they  can  save  :J47.07  per  arc  lamp  per  j'ear. 

The  city  of  Detroit  owns  its  own  plant,  and  is  considered  the  best 
lij^hted  citj'  in  America,  and,  from  accounts,  a  very  dearly  lighted  one. 
In  various  publications  I  Hud  their  cost  given  at  *4(j.40  j)er  arc  lamp  per 
annum,  when  they  admit  in  their  own  report  that,  allowins:  only  a  threev 
per  cent  dei)reciation,  their  arc  lumps  actually-  cost  them  8'<'''J.5G  per 
annum.  With  proper  charge  for  depreciation  of  ten  jier  cent,  etc.,  it  will 
be  found  that  Detroit  lights  actually  cost  them  8102.30  per  annum, 
taking  the  figures  of  e.xperts. 

The  few  other  municipal  plants  that  I  could  learn  anj'thing  about 
ran  their  electric  plants  in  conutection  with  other  municipal  iilants,  and 
were  either  unable  to  furnish  me  with  information  desired  or  were 
unwilling  to  do  so.  Some  few  ran  them  in  connection  with  water  works, 
and  hardly  knew  themselves  what  it  cost  them.  From  various  publica- 
titms  I  find  (piite  a  number  of  municipal  plants  in  diftereut  cities  con- 
ducted on  the  lines  already'  referred  to,  and  their  lights  costing  them,  in 
each  instance,  except  where  operated  by  water  power  or  located  in  a 
much  smaller  city  than  ours,  if  anything,  more  than  we  pay  at  present 
for  our  arc  lights. 


MUNICIPAL  OWNERSHIP  PREVENTS  IMPROVE- 
MENTS. 

An  es.say  upon  municipal  ownership,  by  Wm.  A. 
Lynch  of  Ohio,  is  so  pertinent,  and  treats  the  subject  so 
ably  and  thorou^jhly,  that  we  quote  portions  of  the  article. 

IS    THERE    A    NEED    OF    CH.\NGE    OF    SYSTEM? 

The  discussions  to-daj'  range  largely  around  the  matters  of  public 
light  works  and  street  railways. 

By  far  the  major  of  these  are  owned  by  private  companies,  under 
legal  restrictions  of  state  and  municipal  control.  May  it  not  be  well  to 
iu(iuire  for  a  moment  into  the  manner  in  which  these  companies  have 
performed  their  duties,  say,  for  the  last  twenty  years?  Will  anj'one 
deny  that  in  that  period  the  public  lighting  service  has  been  vastlj'  im- 
proved in  character,  and  for  each  dollar  paid  the  public  receives  vastly 
more  in  return  than  in  1H80?  Has  any  i)ublic  service  been  better  ren- 
dered, or  more  greatly  imi)roved,  than  that  of  public  lighting  in  the 
period  referred  to  ? 

And  how  is  it  as  to  street  railways?  In  the  short  space  of  twelve 
years  or  so  a  complete  revolution  has  been  ati'eeted  in  our  street  railway 
transportation.     At  enormous  cost,   with  prodigious  energy  and  large 

51 


sacrifice,  tlie  old  horse  car  street  railway' system  has  passed  away  and  the 
new,  the  bright,  the  efficient  electric  system  has  taken  its  place. 

It  should  not  be  forgotten  that  these  vast  improvements  in  light- 
ing and  transportation  have  been  effected  by  private  enterprise  and  pri- 
vate capital,  working  through  private  corporations. 

The  electric  railway  has  cheapened  the  cost  of  service  equally  with 
the  electric  light,  for  while  the  nickel  still  remains  the  standard  charge, 
yet  by  the  lengthening  of  the  lines,  pushing  them  out  into  the  suburbs, 
consolidating  them,  transferring  from  line  to  line,  a  lengthened  ride,  a 
quicker  one,  and  a  vastly  pleasanter  one,  has  been  ofi"ered  to  the  public 
without  increase  of  fare. 

In  less  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  a  great  revolution  has  been 
wrought.  Great  problems  have  been  attacked,  immense  difficulties  have 
been  overcome  and  large  successes  achieved.  I  doubt  if  in  the  history 
of  the  world  greater  improvements  of  a  practical  kind  have  been  worked 
out  and  accomplished,  in  so  short  a  time,  as  we  have  seen  in  this  country 
in  respect  to  the  public  improvements  to  which  I  have  referred.  I  desire 
to  say  now,  with  all  possible  seriousness  and  emphasis,  that  these  im- 
provements have  been  due  to  the  fact,  above  all  others,  that  these  pub- 
lic services  have  been  intrusted  to  private  enterprise,  working  their  pri- 
vate capital,  and  that  under  no  other  system  could  they  have  been 
brought  about. 

I  think  this  is  a  point  worthy  of  more  careful  thought.  Suppose 
that  the  system  which  is  now  strenuously  proposed,  viz. ,  the  municipal 
ownership  and  control  of  these  services  had  been  established  fifty  years 
ago,  and  all  the  gas  works,  street  railway's  and  the  like,  had  been  owned 
by  the  cities  and  towns.  What  would  have  been  the  fate  of  the  electric 
light,  and  where,  to-day,  would  be  the  electric  railway? 

What  made  the  electric  light  possible  ?  When  the  first  dynamo  was 
produced,  about  1866,  affording  the  first  means  which  had  been  devel- 
oped for  the  cheap  generation  of  electricity,  eager  minds  turned  at  once 
to  apply  it  to  the  generation  of  light  and  power  for  practical  purposes. 
The  thought  was  simple  enough,  the  thing  was  a  world  of  difficulties. 
Years  of  experiment  in  the  field  of  actual  use  were  necessary  to  bring 
success.  The  enterprise  of  private  companies,  acting  upon  competitive 
lines,  furnished  the  field.  Gas-producing  interests  stood  solidly  in- 
trenched against  the  newcomer,  but  being  virtually  all  in  the  hands  of 
private  capital,  other  capital  took  up  the  cause  of  the  electric  light, 
introduced  it,  worked  with  it,  improved  it  and  made  it  a  success,  and 
then  pushed  it  with  an  aggressive  earnestness  without  parallel  in  the 
history  of  business  enterprise.  W^hat  would  have  been  the  result,  what 
chance  would  the  electric  light  have  had  of  introduction,  experiment, 
development  or  success,  if  all  the  gas  works  of  the  country  at  that  time 
had  been  owned  by  the  municipalities  ?  Competition  would  have  been 
impossible.  The  entering  wedge  could  not  have  been  inserted,  much  less 
driven  home.  There  would  have  been  no  inducement  to  taxpayers  to 
have  taken  up  the  new  bantling,  and  fought  its  battles  for  it  against 
their  own  interests, 

52 


The  city  of  Wheeling  is  referred  to  as  perhaps  the  most  marked 
example  of  successful  muuicipal  management  of  gasworks.  Cheap  and 
abundant  coal  near  at  hand  and  a  well- selected  l)oard  of  trustees 
resulted  in  producing  cheap  gas.  \yhen  the  electric  light  knocked  at  its 
portals,  it  received  no  recognition.  Wheeling  did  not  have  an  electric 
light  on  its  streets  until  all  other  towns  in  the  United  States  of  two 
thousand  population,  and  many  below  that  size,  had  their  streets  well 
lighted  by  the  electric  light.  The  city's  large  investment  in  its  gas 
plant  was  sufticient  argument  against  the  admission  of  a  competitor,  and 
when  some  of  its  enterprising  citizens  built  a  small  incandescent  plant 
for  private  lighting,  and  started  to  make  their  waj'  from  block  to  block, 
the}'  at  first  found  it  necessary  to  cross  a  street  by  drawing  the  wires 
through  a  pipe  laid  for  the  ostensible  purpose  of  conveying  water.  Had 
all  the  cities  owned  their  gas  works,  had  the  system  of  municipal  owner- 
ship generally  prevailed,  it  is  safe  to  say  that  the  immense  improvement 
made  in  street  lighting  bj-  the  electric  light  would  not  have  come  in  our 
time. 

The  indisposition  of  municipal  authorities  toward  the  prompt  intro- 
duction of  large  improvements  would  have  manifested  itself  in  respect 
to  street  railwaj-s  if  the^'  had  been  owned  bj'  the  municipalities  instead 
of  private  companies.  Has  anyone  slop))ed  to  consider  the  enormous 
increase  of  investment  which  the  change  from  the  horse  railway  to  the 
electric  railway  has  called  for  ?  Would  the  cities  have  managed  the 
numberless  experiments,  overcome  the  enorrcous  difficulties  and  care- 
full}-,  patiently  worked  out  problems  involved  in  this  change  ? 

HOW   ABOrT  THE   FUTURE  ? 

But  it  may  be  said,  fortunately  for  us,  the  cities  generally  did  not 
own  the  gas  works  or  the  railroads — the  field  was  open  for  private  capi- 
tal to  accomplish  these  results,  but  now  that  they  have  been  accom- 
plished, it  is  time  for  the  city  to  enter  the  field  and  reap  the  harvest. 
We  will  now  permit  the  city  to  build  'its  light  plant  and  enter  into  com- 
petition with  the  private  company  which  has  helped  to  make  the  electric 
light  possible.  If  it  is  in  our  waj'  we  will  destroj'  it,  b}^  furnishing  the 
light  at  a  diminished  price,  for  we  have  an  inexaustible  fund  upon  which 
to  draw,  viz.,  the  resources  of  the  taxpayer,  which  thecompauj^  does  not 
possess.  The  company,  therefore,  must  submit  to  be  ruined,  or  turn 
over  to  the  cit}'  its  plant  at  a  price  which  will  represent  the  cost  of 
reproduction,  without  allowance  for  the  value  of  its  franchise,  its  earn- 
ing power  or  its  good  will,  to  say  nothing  of  compensation  for  its  sacri- 
fices and  losses  made  in  the  earlier  portion  of  its  history. 

If  this  position  is  just,  is  it  safe  'i  Is  it  prudent  to  assume  that  there 
are  to  be  no  improvements  in  the  future  ?  All  improvements  in  the  past 
have  been  made  at  the  expense  of  the  private  capital  which  had  been 
invested  before  the  introduction  of  the  improvement.  Has  the  inventive 
faculty  of  man  exhausted  itself?  Is  the  electric  light  of  to-daj'  the  end 
of  improvement?  If  the  municii>alities  of  Ohio  now  build  up,  at  large 
expense,  electric  lighting  plants  on  the  most  approved  lines  of  the  pres- 


ent,  have  we  any  assurance  that  they  may  not  in  the  future  be  wipecl  out, 
or  be  made  vastly  less  valuable  by  the  inventions  and  improvements  of 
the  future  ? 

AXOTHEK   ASPECT    OF   FUTURE    lilPEOVEMENT. 

I  have  been  pointing  out  that  under  the  plan  of  municipal  owner- 
ship, the  municipal  investment  must  run  the  risk  of  new  improvements 
in  plant  or  process — but  there  is  another  more  important  aspect  in  this 
question  of  future  improvements.  The  public  want  the  improvements — 
they  get  the  benefit  of  them ;  it  gives  them  a  better  light,  a  better  ser- 
vice. With  all  the  instiiimentalities  of  generating  light,  transporting 
people  and  performing  the  other  public  services  in  the  hands  of  the 
municipality,  [the  introduction  of  improvements  will  be  discouraged. 
To-day  it  is  encouraged  by  the  reason  of  the  competition  offered  by 
those  who  are  serving  the  public  or  are  desirous  of  serving  it.  Take 
light  again,  for  instance.  When  the  electric  light  threatened  to  over- 
whelm gas  investments  with  destruction,  new  processes  in  gasmaking 
were  introduced  which  cheapened  the  gas,  diminished  the  price  to  the 
consumer,  and  sustained  the  gas  companies.  And  now,  with  the  intro- 
duction of  the  Welsbach  and  other  improved  burners,  gas  is  closely 
pressing  the  electric  light ;  the  price  of  both  to  the  consumer  is  falling 
and  the  service  of  each  improved,  and  within  the  past  year  both  these 
lights  are  meeting  sharp  competition  from  the  incandescent  vapor  lights 
of  various  kinds.  But  with  all  the  light  works  in  the  hands  of  the 
municipalities,  the  motive  for  this  constant  striiggle  for  improvement, 
this  competition  for  public  favor  and  patronage  would  be  wholly  de- 
stroyed. 

THE    QUESTION    OF    COST. 

If  the  cities  of  Ohio  generally  enter  upon  the  plan  of  owning  their 
own  lighting  plants  and  operating  them,  the  works  will  not  be  generally 
as  well  managed,  and  the  cost  to  the  consumer  and  taxpayer  united  will 
not  be  as  small  as  though  that  service  were  left  with  private  companies, 
under  proper  public  regulations.  This,  to  my  mind,  covers  the  whole 
question  of  cost.  It  is  useless  to  cite  "isolated  cases  of  a  city  here  or 
there  that  has  been  fortunate  enough  in  its  management  for  a  year  or  so 
to  enable  it  to  produce  a  cheap  electric  light.  That  all  goes  for  nothing. 
What  would  the  system  of  municipal  ownership  as  a  system  result  in,  if 
generally  introduced  ?  Judge  from  the  management  of  municipal  affairs 
in  other  departments.  There  could  be  but  one  result ;  it  would  be  more 
costly  in  the  long  run,  taking  a  term  of  years  together. 

ILIi   EFFECTS    OF    CHANGES   OF   MANAGEMENT. 

If  lighting  plants  and  street  railways  were  generally  owned  by  the 
cities,  a  serious  drawback  would  be  felt  in  frequent  changes  of  manage- 
ment that^would  likely.follow.  These  plants  are  much  more  complicated, 
employ  more  labor,  require  more  technical  skill  than  water  works,  and 
call  for  consistent  plans  patiently  worked  out  to  give  them  any  show  of 
success. 

54 


THE   INTERESTS   OF   LAROR. 

When  we  consider  the  rifrhts  of  the  men  who  operate  these  works, 
another  question  arises.  Private  companies  make  it  a  special  point  to 
retain  the  services  of  competent  men  as  k)n<<  as  they  faithfully  perform 
their  duties.  Under  municipal  ownership  they  might  find  their  tenure  of 
place  very  uncertain  as  the  spring  election  approaches,  and  all  the  evils 
of  the  spoils  system,  with  its  hardships  and  injustice,  might  be  appre- 
hended. It  certainly  would  be  a  most  unsatisfactory  system  of  employ- 
ment if  the  places  of  the  men  depended  upon  the  i-esult  oi  an  election, 
as  would  undoubtedly  be  the  case  under  a  general  sj^stem  of  municipal 
ownership. 

EFFECTS   UPON   OUR   POIilTICAIi   INSTITUTIONS. 

Every  patriotic  citizen  should  feel  that  there  are  considerations 
deeper  than  those  springing  from  dollars  and  cents.  Every  important 
change  ])roposed  in  our  public  affairs  must  be  challenged  as  to  its  proba- 
ble effect  upon  the  public  welfare.  It  seems  to  be  generally  conceded 
that  the  crying  evil  of  municipal  management,  especially  in  our  larger 
cities,  is  bossism.  Bossism  feeds  upon  patronage.  Municipal  owner- 
ship carried  to  the  full  would  enormously  increase  patronage.  Would  it 
not  increase  m  equal  degree  the  opportunities  and  power  of  the  boss  ^  I 
cannot  say,  as  in  my  little  city  we  have  no  bosses.  It  is  claimed  that 
municipal  ownership  would  purify  our  politics  and  destroy  the  power  of 
the  i)olitical  boss.  It  is  said  that  the  public  conscience  would  be  quick- 
ened and  the  enlightened  attention  of  the  citizens  would  be  turned  upon 
these  matters,  and  that  an  exalted  civil  service  will  be  established  for  the 
selection  and  employment  of  all  public  servants. 

Past  experience  has  not  largely  justified  this  claim.  If  the  people 
of  our  large  cities  are  willing  to  leave  the  immense  concerns  of  the  mu- 
nicipality to  the  bosses,  and  to  bear  the  heavy  burdens  of  constantly  in- 
creasing taxation,  with  but  spasmodic  protests,  is  it  likely  that  the  addi- 
tion of  a  lighting  plant  would  work  regeneration  ?  Philadelphia's  own- 
ership of  its  gasworks  did  not  seem  to  have  that  effect. 

In  the  present  state  of  the  development  of  the  race  we  must  regard 
these  sounding  claims  of  the  municipal  reformer  as  decidedlj' chimerical. 
A  reform  which  depends  for  success  upon  amaterial  change  in  human  na- 
ture has  little  to  recommend  it.  Practical  minds,  who  have  had  some- 
thing to  do  with  afiairs,  are  disposed  to  judge  of  the  future  somewhat 
from  the  experience  of  the  past. 


00 


THE  BASIS  OF  MUNICIPAL  OWNERSHIP. 

The  Electrical  Review  says  : 

The  whole  matter  seems,  in  a  way,  too  simple  for  elaborate  discus- 
sion. The  mianicipalitj'  has  no  right  to  tax  its  citizens  save  for  their 
own  benefit.  It  is  conceded  by  all  people  that  the  maintenance  of  such 
institutions  as  the  necessary  courts  of  justice,  the  machinery  of  admin- 
istration, the  protection  of  life  and  property  by  police  and  fire  depart- 
ments, the  maintenance  of  sanitary  conditions,  etc.,  are  things  which  all 
citizens  are  directly  and  vitally  interested  and  for  which  it  is  proper  that 
every  person  living  within  the  scope  of  the  municipal  government  should 
be  required  to  pay  his  proportionate  part.  This  elementary  principle  of 
justice  can  not,  however,  be  made  to  include  those  services  which  supply 
only  a  part  of  the  citizens  and  not  all.  For  example,  the  distribution  of 
water,  which  is  a  commodity  needed  by  every  person,  as  well  as  by  the 
community  at  large  for  the  protection  against  fire  and'  sanitary  purposes, 
is  fitly  within  the  province  of  the  municipality.  The  distribution  of  gas 
or  electricity  for  lighting  is  not  an  essential,  except  in  so  far  as  it  relates 
to  lighting  streets  and  public  places.  If  a  municipality  undertakes  to 
supply  the  consumers  with  electric  light  it  enters  into  one  or  the  other 
of  three  things,  which  are  easily  proved  to  be  inequitaT[)le  :  If  the  plant 
is  operated  at  a  loss,  the  taxpayers  as  a.  body  miist  make  up  the  de- 
ficit for  the  benefit  of  the  individuals  who  use  light.  If  it  is  operated 
at  a  profit,  the  individuals  who  use  light  must  pay  the  profit  to  the 
relief  of  the  body  of  taxpayers,  who  would  otherwise  be  called  upon 
to  provide  the  increased  income.  If  it  is  run  at  neither  a  profit  nor 
a  loss,  then  the  municipal  government  is  gratuitously  undertaking 
the  burden  and  responsibility  of  a  business  which  is  not  profitable 
to  it  and  which,  by  extinguishing  the  opportunity  for  competition, 
deprives  its  citizens  of  a  certain  just  and  natural  right  to  buy  in 
the  cheapest  market  the  coynmodity  that  they  need. 

This,  it  seems,  is  the  common  sense  of  the  municipal  ownership  sit- 
uation. It  is  of  interest  to  observe  the  change  in  opinion  which  is  grad- 
ually coming  over  the  public  in  Great  Britain,  where  for  years  the  muni- 
cipal operation  of  such  public  services  has  obtained.  While  these  have 
been  admirably  conducted  from  the  point  of  view  of  economical  administra- 
tion and  upright  and  honest  management,  they  have  failed  to  satisfy  the 
public,  and  there  is  a  constantly  increasing  demand  for  the  chartering 
of  private  concerns  to  engage  in  the  same  lines  of  work.  In  other 
Avords,  even  in  the  oldest  and  most  conservative  community  in  which 
municipal  ownership  has  had  a  fair  trial,  it  has  proved  itself  a  failure. 
It  seems  strange,  therefore,  that  such  a  thing  should  be  advocated  in 
this  country,  and  doubtless  the  reason  for  its  warm  championship  is  often 
to  be  found  in  political  aspirations  on  the  part  of  self-seeking  members 
of  municipal  governments. 


AN  ADVOCATE  OF  MUNICIPAL  OWNERSHIP 

Has  famished  whut  he  calls  a  list  of  the  municipal  plauts  in  each 
«tate.  An  examination  of  this  list  discloses  the  fact  that  there  are  quite 
a  large  number  of  cities  which  he  reports  as  havinoj  municipal  plants 
who  are  furnished  by  private  companies  under  contract,  and,  by  his 
list,  there  are  only  o7  plants  in  the  entire  United  States  in  places  large 
enough  so  that  the  business  to  be  obtained  would  properly  support  a 
private  plant  ;  all  the  others  are  in  small  cities  or  villages,  where  they 
were  compelled  to  adopt  municipal  ownership  in  order  to  secure  electric 
lights.  The  list  shows  that  in  1892  there  were  25  municipal  plants  estab- 
lished ;  in  1893,  15 ;  in  1894,  nine  ;  in  1895,  ten  ;  in  189G,  seven  ;  and  in 
1898,  only  b ;  thus  showing  a  steady  decrease  ;  and  indicate  that  when 
tax  payers  began  to  tind  out  the  fallacj-  of  the  statements  of  advocates  of 
municipal  ownership,  and  the  true  fact  as  to  the  cost  of  such  plants,  they 
refused  to  be  drawn  into  the  political  trap. 


WHAT  DO  INCANDESCENT  LIGHTS  COST? 

The  claim  is  often  made  that  municipalities  can  pro- 
duce incandescent  lights  for  five  cents  per  kilowatt,  and 
that  the  profits  at  that  price  will  pay  all  expenses  of  street 
lio-htingf. 

HUDSON,  Mass.,  a  town  with  a  population  of  5,308,  installed,  in 
1897,  an  electric  plant  at  an  expense  of  >'39,454.  After  embarking  in  this 
business  they  found  thej'  could  not  oi)erate  the  plant  without  a  loss,  and 
the  laws  of  that  state  prohibit  a  municipalit}'  conducting  a  business  under 
these  conditions.  They  therefore  applied  to  the  commissioners  for  per- 
mission to  operate  and  levy  a  tax  to  cover  the  loss.  The  commissioners 
granted  a  hearing,  and  after  re^•iewing  the  case  and  the  testimonj-  sub- 
mitted, the  board  saj- :  ' '  It  clearly  appears  that  the  cost  for  service  is  con- 
siderably in  excess  of  the  present  prices  of  20  cents  per  kilowatt  hour. 
The  board  will  give  the  matter  favorable  consideration,  but  the  application 
of  public  funds  raised  b3'  taxation  to  meet  the  deficit  so  created  in  the 
operating  expenses  of  a  municipal  plant  is  repugnant  to  the  idea  of  a  fair 
and  equal  sharing  in  thebenelits  as  well  as  the  burdens  of  governments." 
'The  commissioners  say  that  the  testimony  submitted  shows  that  the  cost 
of  producing  the  lights  is  considerably  in  excess  of  20  cents  per  kilowatt. 

57 


^'OUT  OF  THE  FRYING  PAN  INTO  THE  FIRE/' 

CHICOPEE,  Mass.  The  following  statement,  made  by  the  mayor 
of  (hicopee,  Mass.,  who  favored  municipal  ownership,  is  like  reports 
from  many  other  cities,  who,  when  they  first  enter  upon  the  experiment, 
are  very  sanguine :  "So  far  as  municipal  electric  street  lighting  is  con- 
cerned, for  the  city  of  Chicopee,  it  is  a  most  decided  success.  When  the 
city  was  under  contract  with  the  electric  lighting  company,  the  price 
paid  per  arc  light,  moonlight  schedule  until  1a.  m.  ,  was  $75  per  light. 
Judging  from  the  year's  experience  of  the  city  in  doing  its  own  street 
lighting,  I  can  see  no  business  reason  why  the  city  cannot  produce  as 
good  lights  at  as  small  a  cost  as  any  private  corporation."  The  mayor 
says  the  lights,  when  furnished  by  a  private  company,  cost  $75  per  lamp 
per  3^ear.  The  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Commissioners  of  Massachusetts 
report  that  the  cost  of  a  1,300  candle  power  arc  light,  furnished  by  the 
municipal  plant,  is  $109.74  per  lamp  per  year,  burned  8.7  hours  per  night 
28.8  nights  per  month. 

GRAND  RAPIDS,  Mich.,  was  paying  $97  per  light  for  a  2,000 
candle  power  lamp  burned  every  night  all  night.  There  were  certain 
politicians  who  thought  there  was  a  chance  for  them  to  ride  into  oflEice  if 
they  shouted  for  municipal  ownership.  They  sent  a  delegation  to 
Detroit,  who  reported  cost  of  producing  lights  in  that  city.  The  private 
company  offered  to  furnish  the  lights  for  the  same  price  it  cost  the 
municipal  plant  in  Detroit  to  produce  them.  They  were  not  satisfied 
with  this,  and  finally  voted  in  April,  1897,  for  municipal  ownership,  and 
appropriated  $150,000,  selling  bonds  amounting  to  $125,000.  A  large 
number  of  tax  payers  remonstrated  and  signed  petitions,  liut,  as  usual, 
the  non-taxpaying  element  voted  to  adopt  the  plan.  The  business  has 
been  a  bungle  from  the  start,  so  much  so  that  even  the  local  papers  say 
the  additional  $40,000  saddled  upon  the  tax  payers  for  the  city  lighting 
was  not  the  first  mistake.  Good  judges  in  that  city  claim  that  it  will  cost 
over  $200,000  to  complete  the  plant.  They  made  a  contract  for  buildings 
with  a  man  who,  the  mayor  says,  "  he  would  not  employ  to  do  work  for 
him  under  any  consideration  "  ;  yet  the  board  employed  such  a  man  for 
this  work,  and  the  foundations  were  constructed.  After  they  were 
completed  and  accepted  by  the  board,  and  paid  for,  it  was  found  that  the 
walls  were  unsafe,  and  the  city  employed  an  expert  to  make  an  exami- 
nation, who  said  they  were  not  properly  bound,  and  the  cement  used  was 
worthless  ;  he  also  stated  that  more  than  half  of  the  entire  walls  would 
have  to  be  rebuilt.  They  then  made  another  contract  to  rebuild  the 
walls  at  the  taxpayers'  expense.  The  wire  run  through  the  streets 
proved  to  be  worthless,  and  would  not  support  its  own  weight,  while  the 
expert  they  called  stated  that  the  loss  on  such  wire  would  be  50  per  cent. 

58 


They  have  one  law  suit  already  upon  their  hands  over  this  i)lant,  and  a 
prospect  for  several  more.  This  whole  business  was  entered  upon  after 
the  private  company  had  offered  to  furnish  the  lights  at  the  same  price 
as  it  cost  in  the  municipal  plant  at  Detroit. 


MUNICIPAL  OWNERSHIP  IN  SANTA  ROSA,  CAL. 

There  has  been  so  much  said  regarding  cities  being 
able  to  purchase  plants  at  a  much  lower  rate  than  private 
companies,  that  we  copy  the  following  report  by  Hon. 
Thos.  V.  Bakewell,  of  the  San  Francisco  bar,  which  shows 
how  such  purchases  are  made  by  municipalities : 

It  i.s  not  the  purpose  of  the  writer  to  enter  upon  an  extended  discus- 
sion of  the  general  suliject  of  municipal  ownership.  Enough  has  been 
alreadj'  said  and  written  upon  both  sides  of  this  question  by  persons 
l)etter  qunlitied  to  discuss  the  subject  than  the  writer.  Nevertheless, 
if  any  facts  can  be  brought  to  the  attention  of  the  public,  which  will  bear 
upon  the  practical  working  of  the  system  in  a  case  in  which  the  experi- 
ment has  been  tried,  it  will  certainly  be  profitable  to  consider  them. 
The  question  in  which  we  are  most  vitally  interested  is  its  applicability 
to  our  own  times  and  conditions,  and,  if  we  are  wise,  we  will  not  fail  to 
I)rotit  by  the  experience  of  others.  Municipal  ownership  is  too  costly  an 
experiment  to  be  engaged  in,  if  it  has  already  proved  futile. 

It  is  my  purpose  to  call  attention  to  a  certain  notable  instance  in 
which  it  has  been  attempted,  in  our  own  state,  and  not  far  distant  from 
our  own  city,  to  put  the  theory  of  municipal  ownership  into  practice,  in 
connection  with  the  water  supply  of  a  city.  I  refer  to  the  public  water 
works  of  the  city  of  Santa  Eosa.  As  it  has  been  asserted  that  municipal 
ownership  is  especially  suited  to  small  cities  and  towns,  it  may  be  well  to 
note  that  the  city  of  Santa  Rosa  is  of  this  class,  its  population  amounting 
at  the  last  census  to  5,2'.in. 

The  facts  stated  herein  are  taken  from  the  findings  and  judgment  of 
the  court  in  the  case  of  Mock  v.  The  City  of  Santa  Rosa,  as  shown  in  the 
transcript  on  appeal  to  the  supreme  court  of  California.  So  far  as  prac- 
tical )le  and  consistent  with  brevity,  we  have  made  use  of  the  language  of 
the  judge  in  the  findings.  The  reliability  of  these  facts  is  vouched  for 
by  the  integrity  and  ability  of  the  judge  who  tried  the  cat-e,  William  R. 
Daiugertield  of  San  Francisco.  Also,  it  may  be  safely  assumed  that  the 
findings  were  fullj'  justified  by  the  evidence  in  the  case  at  the  trial,  as 

59 


there  -was  no  appeal  taken  on  that  ground.  The  supreme  court  affirmed 
Judge  Daingerfield's  decision. 

The  attempt  to  construct  a  system  of  public  water  works  in  the  city 
of  Santa  Rosa  has  proved  an  absolute  failure.  The  city  council,  having 
taken  the  necessary  preliminary  steps  required  by  the  statute  of  1889  as 
amended,  ordered  a  special  election  to  be  held  on  March  7th,  1893,  to 
vote  on  the  question  of  the  issuance  by  the  city  of  bonds  amounting  to 
$165,000,  to  pay  for  a  system  of  public  water  works.  The  bonds  were  to 
bear  interest  at  four  per  cent,  payable  annually  at  a  place  to  be  fixed 
therein  by  the  council.  The  necessary  notices  were  given,  and  the  voters 
of  the  city,  on  the  day  named,  decided  in  favor  of  the  bonds  by  a  two- 
thirds  majority.  One  C.  Monjeau  had  previousl3%  at  the  order  of  the 
council,  prepared  plans  and  specifications,  together  with  two  estimates 
of  costs,  one  amounting  to  !?165,000,  and  one  amounting  to  $199, 500,  and 
these  were  placed  on  file  with  the  city  clerk  on  March  23,  1893.  On 
September  8th,  1894,  the  council  ordered  a  notice  to  contractors  to  be 
published,  asking  for  bids  on  the  construction  of  the  water  works.  This 
notice  specified  that  the  works  were  to  be  constructed  according  to  the 
specifications  of  Monjeau  on  file  with  the  clerk  ;  that  bids  must  be 
accompanied  by  specifications,  and  also  by  a  bond  in  six  per  cent  of  the 
amount  of  the  bids,  binding  the  successful  bidder  to  enter  into  a  contract 
with  the  city  for  the  construction  of  the  works,  and  further  binding  him 
to  furnish  a  bond  in  75  per  cent  of  the  amount  of  the  bid  to  secure  per- 
formance of  the  contract  ;  and  the  bids  were  to  be  opened  on  September 
24th,  1894. 

At  some  time  prior  to  September  22d,  Robert  Eflfey  and  W.  T. 
Garratt  &  Co.  entered  into  an  agreement  whereby  it  was  agreed  that,  in 
case  Effey  got  the  contract,  Garratt  ^fe  Co.  would  build  the  works  for  him 
for  an  amount  less  than  $120,000,  and  would  furnish  a  bond  for  $120,000 
to  do  the  work,  and  that  they  would  also  offer  a  bid  themselves. 
Accordingly,  Garrett  &  Co.  delivered  to  Effey  on  September  22d,  1894,  a 
bid  purporting  to  be  executed  by  them,  offering  to  do  the  work  according 
to  the  specifications  legally  adopted.  Effey  filled  in  the  amount, 
$164,500,  and  the  clause  "  the  city  to  furnish  the  water  rights,  land,  and 
rights  of  way,"  wrote  upon  the  envelope  ''  city  of  Santa  Rosa,  bids  for 
construction,"  and  delivered  the  bid  to  the  city  clerk,  on  September  24th. 
On  the  same  day  Effey  filed  a  bid  on  his  own  behalf  offering  to  do  the 
work  "according  to  plans  and  specifications  herewith  submitted"  for 
$161,000.  This  bid  was  accompanied  by  a  check  for  $10,000.  The  court 
found  that  the  script  portions  of  these  two  bids,  and  also  the  writing 
upon  the  envelopes  were  manifestly  the  same  handwriting,  either  that  of 
Effey  or  of  one  Pitchford,  as  his  agent  in  the  premises. 

It  is  not  the  purpose  of  this  writer  to  detract  from  the  reputations  of 
the  gentlemen  concerned  in  this  matter,  and  yet  this  state  of  affairs  must 
be  ascribed  either  to  gross  incompetence,  or  to  collusion,  on  the  part  of 
the  city  council.  Their  subsequent  action  would  seem  to  point  to  the 
latter  conclusion.  Here  were  but  two  bids,  both  of  them  very  exorbitant. 
The  court  finds  that  Effey  knew  that  he  could  build  the  works,  as  called 

60 


tor  by  the  notice,  for  very  much  less  than  $120,000.  Nevertheless,  he 
putiu  a  bid  to  build  much  less  complete  works  for  8161,0'  0,  and,  iu  order 
to  make  his  owu  bid  seem  moderate,  put  iu  another  bid,  in  the  name  of 
Garrett  it  Co.,  for  8164,500.  This  last  bid  did  not  even  comply  with  the 
formal  requisites  of  the  notice,  not  beinjj  accompanied  by  specifications, 
and  the  two  bids  were,  as  to  the  script  portions,  manifestly  in  the  same 
handwriting.  If  the  common  council  of  a  city  can  be  deceived  by  as 
patent  a  device  as  this,  it  would  seem  better  to  endeavor  to  limit,  rather 
thau  to  extend,  the  amount  of  business  affairs  placed  in  their  hands. 
Furthermore,  thej'  awarded  the  contract  in  plain  contravention  of  law,  it 
being  a  first  principle  of  law  that  such  contracts  shall  be  awarded  only 
after  the  public  has  had  a  lawful  opportunity'  to  bid  upon  the  contract 
awarded. 

This  was  the  agreement  which  was  eventually  carried  out.  Eflfey's 
control  over  the  mayor  and  council  seems  to  have  been  absolute.  They 
accepted  his  bid  for  the  construction  of  the  works,  when  it  was  the  only 
one  made  which  complied  with  the  formal  requisite  of  being  accompanied 
by  specifications ;  when  it  was  exorbitant  ;  when  it  was  manifestly 
collusive  with  the  only  other  offer  received,  and  when  it  was  void,  on 
account  of  variance  from  the  requirements  called  for  by  their  former 
steps  ;  they  attempted  to  issue  bonds  more  valuable  than  they  had  the 
power  of  issuing,  with  the  purpose  of  turning  them  over  to  him ;  and, 
when  they  foxmd  this  impossible,  they  issued  l)onds  knowing  that  they 
could  not  dispose  of  them  legally,  and  with  the  purpose  of  turning  them 
over  to  Efl'e}',  in  contravention  of  law.  The  mayor  and  council  then 
devoted  themselves  to  carrying  out  this  agreement,  and  to  so  changing 
the  plans  as  to  enable  Effey  to  make  a  greater  profit. 

About  Augiist  loth,  189o,  the  mayor  and  council  ordered  the  treas- 
urer to  return  to  Effey  the  check  for  $10,000  which  accompanied  his  bid, 
and  no  other  check  was  ever  given  by  Effey  on  his  bid. 

On  September  28th,  1895,  the  mayor,  E.  F,  Woodward,  Robert  Ef- 
iey,  J.  W.  Goodwin  and  Paul  B.  Perkins,  met  together  in  San  Francisco, 
and  the  following  agreement  was  made  :  Effey  was  to  be  absolved  from 
furnishing  any  bonds  to  the  city  for  faithful  jierformance  of  the  contract 
about  to  be  let  to  him ;  Etfey  was  to  thereafter  assign  the  contract  to 
Perkins  in  pursuance  of  an  agreement  between  Eflfey  and  Perkins  that 
the  latter  would  construct  the  work  for  a  sum  not  exceeding  §120,000, 
and  Perkins  was  to  execute  to  the  city  a  bond  in  the  sum  of  $40,000  to 
construct  the  works  according  to  the  Monjeau  plan.  On  the  evening  of 
the  same  day,  at  nine  o'clock,  Effey,  Perkins,  Goodwin,  the  city  clerk, 
the  city  treasurer,  the  mayor  and  the  common  council  met  together 
in  Santa  Rosa.  The  council  passed  a  resolution  authorizing  E.  F. 
Woodward,  the  ma3'or,  in  behalf  of  the  city  of  Santa  Rosa,  to  enter 
into  a  contract  with  Effey  for  the  construction  of  a  S3'stem  of  water 
works  in  accordance  with  the  Moujeaii  plans,  and  authorizing  the  city 
clerk  to  draw  a  warrant  on  the  treasury  for  $161,000,  payable  to  Effey, 
and  directing  the  city  clerk  to  deliver  the  same  to  Efifey.  The  contract  was 
signed  by  the  mayor  and  Effey,  and  the  treasury  warrant  was  delivered  to 

61 


Effey.  Perkins  gave  a  bond  for  $40,000  to  construct  the  works.  All  the 
parties  then  ratified  the  agreements  described  above  ashavin^:,  been  made 
iu  Sau  Francisco,  on  the  same  day,  by  the  mayor,  Effey,  Perkins  and 
Goodwin,  and  in  effect  consummated  the  original  design  to  deliver  the 
bonds  to  Effey  as  a  payment  in  advance  for  the  construction  of  the 
works.  We  do  not  purpose  to  encumber  this  article  l)}^  a  detailed 
account  of  the  devices  by  which  the  parties  concerned  attempted  to  give 
color  of  law  to  this  transaction.  The  court  found  that  Effey  never  paid 
to  the  city  of  Santa  Rosa,  nor  to  the  treasurer,  any  sum  of  money 
whatsoever  for  the  bonds,  as  he  was  required  to  do  by  law.  'the  court 
also  found  that  the  mayor  and  council,  in  taking  these  steps  desired  and 
intended,  if  it  were  legally  possible,  to  ratify  all  voidable  proceedings 
connected  with  the  contract  and  water  bonds,  as  to  bind  the  municipal- 
ity, so  that  complaining  taxpayers  could  not  successfully  litigate  these 
matters  in  the  courts,  and  also  intended  and  desired  to  head  off  and 
avoid  any  injunction  or  other  judicial  obstruction,  and  further  that  they 
believed  that  they  were  acting  for  the  best  interests  of  the  municipality 
in  so  doing,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  they  also  knew  not  only  the 
voidness  of  the  Effey  bill,  but  that  the  superior  court  had  so  declared, 
and  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  they  believed  that  their  course,  in 
refusing  to  treat  the  Effey  bill  as  void,  would  prevent  litigation  and  ex- 
pedite the  construction  of  the  water  works,  by  summarily  depriving 
complaining  taxpayers  of  redress  from  the  courts.  But  the  court  con- 
cluded that,  despite  of  this  intention,  their  acts  in  endeavoring  to  estop 
the  municipality  in  the  premises,  after  full  knowledge  of  the  voidness 
of  Effey's  bid,  were  fraudulent  and  void  as  against  the  city  and  its  tax- 
payers. 

As  to  the  claimed  agreement  that  Perkins  would  construct  the  works 
in'accordance  with  the  Moujeau  plans  and  specifications,  the  court  con- 
cluded that  the  voidness  of  his  bid  and  of  his  contract  was  not  cured 
thereby,  for  the  reason  that  his  estimates  of  cost  whereou  he  made  his 
bid  were  founded  on  his  own  offer  and  not  on  the  Monjeau  plans.  This 
agreement  was  evidently  made  for  the  purpose  of  curing  the  defect 
which  arose  from  the  discrepancy  between  the  terms  of  Effey's  bid  and 
the  notice  to  contractors  5  but  no  one  except  Effey  ever  had  an  oppor- 
tunity to  make  an  offer  or  bid  on  the  work,  from  October  4th,  1S'.)4,  when 
Effey's  l)id  was  accepted  by  the  council,  to  September  28th,  1805,  when 
it  was  made  to  comply  with  the  notice,  nor  was  any  notice  ever  given 
that  the  bonds  would  be  paid  instead  of  money,  for  the  work,  nor  that 
the  bond  reciuired  to  be  given  in  three-fourths  of  the  amount  of  the  bid, 
to  secure  performance  of  the  contract,  would  be  waived.  As  a  result  of 
this  Judge  Daingerfield  found  that  the  bid  accepted  was  at  least  $70,000 
higher  than  would  have  been  bid  to  construct  the  works  according  to  the 
plans  of  Monjeau  if  the  general  public  had  been  offered  the  same  condi- 
tions as  were  ofiered  Effey,  or  if  there  had  been  money  in  tJie  treasury 
applicable  to  the  payment  of  an  accepted  bid  ;  and  responsible  persons 
who  examined  the  specifications  on  file,  with  a  view   to  bidding  on  the 


62 


cuutract,  were  deterred  from  so  doiuj;,  by  reason  of  these  facts  nnd  b}' 
reason  of  threatened  litijrution. 

The  mayor  and  oonucil  now  commenced  a  systematic  course  of  so 
altering;  the  Monjeau  phms  as  to  whollj'  chan^'e  the  nature  of  the  con- 
tract. On  December  lUth,  181)5,  they  passed  a  resohition  chanjjfiug  the 
phins  so  as  to  call  for  the  erection  of  a  pumping:  station  according  to 
phius  of  Perkins  filed  with  the  clerk  on  that  day,  instead  of  in  accordance 
with  those  of  Monjeau  ;  for  the  buildinj;  of  a  reservoir,  wholly  dilTerent 
in  character  and  much  lessexpensive  tlian  that  called  for  l)y  the  Monjeau 
plans  ;  for  pumps  accordin^jj  to  Perkins'  own  plans,  instead  of  ^Nlonjeau's; 
for  boilers  of  a  wholly  different  character  from  those  called  for  by  the 
Monjeau  plans,  and  for  Perkins'  hydrants.  On  Deceml)er  2:5d,  18!)"),  the 
council  i)assed  a  resohition  providinjj:  for  the  erection  of  a  cottajje  for  the 
engineer  at  the  pumpiug-statiou,  according  to  plans  of  Perkins  liled  at 
the  time. 

Ab8olutel3'  no  consideration  passed  to  the  city  for  making  these 
changes.  It  had  been  i)rovided  in  the  specifications  of  Monjeau  that,  in 
case  of  an  J'  change  in  the  plans,  the  price  of  the  work  as  changed  shouhl 
be  fi.xed  bj*  arbitration  between  the  contractor  and  the  council,  but  the 
price  of  the  changes  above  referred  to  was  never  so  fixed.  This  was 
simply  a  voluntary-  relinquishing,  by  the  city,  of  certain  rights.  The 
loss  to  the  city  by  these  alone  amounted  to  $9,000. 

Furthermore,  the  works  were  so  poorly  constructed  that  their  actual 
worth  to  the  city  was  less  than  the  cost  of  constructing  them.  For 
example,  by  reason  of  faulty  construction,  one  of  the  pumi)s  and  boilers, 
constituting  one-half  of  the  plant  at  the  pumping  station,  was  unable  to 
draw  water  from  the  wells,  and,  on  that  account,  had  to  be  removed  from 
tliH  punii)ing  station  and  re-erected  at  the  wells,  at  a  cost  to  the  city  of 
.$4.(!l'.).!);l  Again,  the  reservoir  was  so  unskillfullj'  constructed  that,  upon 
the  first  day  of  its  test,  it  cracked  and  leaked  when  filled,  and  the  water 
escaped  from  the  reservoir. 

The  council  further  displayed  its  generosity  towards  Effey  by  allow- 
ing bills  against  the  city  for  alleged  extras  8api>lied  to  the  city,  amounting 
to  !*1,28(»,  all  of  which,  excei)t  !i*114.  was  for  work  aiul  materials  which 
were  called  for,  not  only  by  his  contract  to  construct  the  works  in 
accordance  with  the  .Monjeau  jjlans,  but  also  were  called  for  \>y  the  terms 
of  the  resolutions  changing  these  plans. 

On  January  2d,  18!»(),  diiring  the  pendency  of  the  suit  of  Mock  v. 
City  of  Santa  Kosa.  which  was  brought  for  the  purpose  of  setting  aside 
Effey'8  contract  and  recovering  damages  against  the  persons  ctjucerned 
in  the  transactions  which  we  Ijave  described,  the  mayor  and  council 
passed  a  resolution  accepting  the  water  works  constructed  by  Perkins 
and  ordering  the  city  marshal  to  take  possession  of  them  on  behalf  of  the 
city,  Perkins  assenting  in  writing.  This  action  was  taken  by  the  mayor 
and  council  in  the  belifd'  that  the  construction  of  the  works  had  been 
practically  finished,  and  that  their  action  would  in  law  have  the  effect  of 
preventing  successful  litigation  against  the  validity  of  the  contract, 
including  the  action  of   IMock   v.    City  of  Santa  Kosa,   and  rendering 

03 


nugatory  any  judgment  in  that  action,  or  in  any  contemplated  litigation. 
It  was  simply  another  fraudulent  and  void  attempt  to  estop  the  city  from 
claiming  its  rights  in  the  premises. 

On  January  2d,  1896,  when  the  city  accepted  and  took  possession  of  the 
public  works  and  offered  to  make  connections  and  supply  water  to  the 
inhabitants,  there  were  1,050  connections  which  had  been  made  with 
other  water  works  in  the  city.  Up  to  December  11th,  1890,  the  time  of 
the  trial  of  the  action  of  Mock  v.  City  of  Santa  Eosa,  and  before  which 
time  the  works  had  been  entirely  completed,  the  greatest  nvimber  of 
connections  which  had  been  made  with  the  public  works  was  (iSO  in  all, 
and  the  works  were  not  able  to  furnish  even  that  number  of  connections 
with  water  during  the  summer  months. 

Besides  this,  the  city  itself  had  to  purchase,  as  a  matter  of  reason- 
able prudence,  water  from  other  water  works  for  municipal  uses,  such  as 
sprinkling  streets  and  flushing  sewers,  at  an  expense  to  the  city,  from 
February  to  December,  1890,  of  $1,184.81, 

The  relation  of  any  legislative  body  to  the  government  for  which  it 
legislates,  whether  municipal  or  state,  is,  so  far  as  administering  its 
finances  is  concerned,  that  of  a  trustee.  It  is  bound  to  guard  the  inter- 
ests of  its  constituent  body  most  jealously.  A  man  who  is  acting  entirely 
on  his  own  behalf  may  be  generous  or  exacting,  as  it  may  suit  his  incli- 
nation ;  but  a  trustee,  in  dealing  with  persons  whose  interests  are  neces- 
sarily opposed  to  those  of  his  beneficary,  is  bound  to  deal  with  them  at 
arm's  length.  That  which  is  an  act  of  charity,  when  the  means  of  doing 
it  are  taken  from  one's  own  pocket,  is  plain  robbery  when  the  means  are 
taken  from  trust  funds.  Therefore  anything  approaching  collusion  on  the 
part  of  the  common  council  of  a  city  with  those  with  whom  the  city  is  con- 
tracting, either  in  the  disposal  of  the  city'sbondsor  in  awarding  of  a  con- 
tract for  public  work,  is  bound  to  prove  disastrous  to  the  city.  In  the  case 
which  we  have  been  considering  the  mayor  and  city  coxincil  seem  to  have 
been  entirely  without  any  volition  in  the  matter  except  to  follow  the  nod 
and  beck  of  Effey  and  Perkins.  They  enacted,  repealed  and  re-enacted 
at  the  behest  of  these  men.  It  matters  not  to  what  reason  we  may 
ascribe  this,  whether  to  dishonesty  on  the  part  of  the  council  or  to  inef- 
ficiency on  their  part,  or  to  craftiness  on  the  part  of  the  persons  with 
whom  they  were  dealing,  in  deceiving  the  council  as  to  the  city's  inter- 
ests. The  result  was  that  the  city  of  Santa  Rosa  paid  $165,701.25  in 
bonds,  besides  $1,286  in  cash,  for  a  system  of  water  works  which  proba- 
bly' could  have  been  built  for  $79,000,  and  were  worth  much  less  on  ac- 
count of  faulty  construction.  Even  then  about  one-half  of  the  city  was 
compelled  to  purchase  its  water  Supply  from  other  water  works. 

Other  cities,  when  contemplating  the  question  of  municipal  owner- 
ship, whether  it  be  of  water  works,  of  railroads  or  of  gas  works,  should 
first  look  carefully  into  the  question  to  ascertain  whether  there  is  reason 
to  suppose  that  their  experience  will  be  different.  The  inefficiency  of 
our  municipal  governments  is  widely  admitted.  Some  have  accounted 
for  it  by  our  form  of  government.  Political  theorists  generally  admit 
that  the  great  drawback  in  the  republican  form  of  government  is  its 

64 


inaptitude  for  administrative  affairs.  The  abilitj-  of  our  municipal  gov- 
ernments successfully  to  undertake  the  ownership  of  water  works  is  ex- 
tremely doubtful,  and  until  it  has  been  demonstrated  it  would  be  well 
for  other  cities  to  keep  Santa  Rosa's  experience  well  in  mind. 


MUNICIPAL  PLANT  RECORDS. 

In  the  reports  from  municipal  plants,  the  actual 
interest  paid  by  each  city  is  given.  Depreciation  is  cal- 
culated in  every  case  at  five  per  cent.  The  best  authorities 
consider  this  too  low.  but,  as  the  Massachusetts  bill  made 
that  rate,  it  has  been  used  in  this  work. 

Operating  expenses  are  precisely  as  shown  by  the 
city  records,  and  no  charge  is  made  for  a  sinking  fund  if 
bonds  were  not  issued.  All  bonds  are  based  upon  20  years, 
but  the  reports  show  that  in  many  cases  they  will  mature 
before  that  time  expires. 

The  income  from  commercial  lights  and  power  are 
the  amounts  as  shown  by  the  official  records  of  each  city, 
also  the  number  of  street  lights  used,  and  their  candle 
power. 

AUSTIN,  Texas .  The  risks  a  municipality  incurs  when  they  adopt 
municipal  ownership  is  shown  by  the  experience  of  Austin. 

They  invested  $1,750,000  in  an  electric  light  and  water  works  plant. 

Contracts  were  made  with  the  two  street  railwaj's  to  furnish  them 
with  power  from  the  citj"  plant. 

In  a  short  time  the  water  began  to  fail,  and  they  had  to  shut  off  all 
lights  and  power,  finally  shutting  down  the  entire  plant. 

This  compelled  one  of  the  railroads  to  haul  their  cars  with  mules, 
while  the  other  rented  locomotives  from  the  Houston  and  Texas  railroad. 

The  city  was  left  in  darkness  for  weeks. 

As  a  climax  to  the  municipal  enterprise,  and  while  the  city  was  on 
the  verge  of  bankruptcy,  caused  by  municipal  ownership,  the  dam, 
which  was  Iniilt  to  furnish  power  and  lights  for  the  citj-  gave  way.  and 
swept  the  electric  light  plant  and  water  works  awa3%  utterly  wrecking 
and  destroying  the  entire  busin<;88,  wiping  out  over  one  hundred  build- 
ings in  the  city,  and  leaving  it  in  darkness,  as  well  as  destitute  of  water 
for  tire  or  domestic  use,  and  entailing  a  loss  of  over  $3,000,000. 

Now,   the  tax  payers  have  to  provide   for  the   debt  of    §1,750,000 

(5) 


expended  in  establishing  the  municipal  plant,  and  the  interest  upon 
same,  as  well  as  the  immense  damage  caused  by  this  failure  of  the  dam, 
and  the  consequent  loss  to  individuals,  for  which  the  city  is  liable ;  while 
they  have  nothing  to  show  for  all  this  expenditure  or  these  liabilities  ; 
everything  is  wrecked. 

Here  we  have  a  practical  illustration  of  the  workings  of  municipal 
ownership,  and  the  risks  a  municipality  assumes  when  they  engage  in  a 
business  enterprise. 

The  advocates  of  the  system  said,  adopt  and  save  a  mint  of  money, 
experience  discloses  an  enormous  loss. 

W.  D.  Hornaday  has  described  the  situation  so  fully,  that  we  quote 
from  his  letter : 

''  Brief  mention  has  been  made  in  the  press  dispatches  of  the  leaks 
in  the  great  dam  across  the  Colorado  river  at  Austin,  Texas,  and  the 
almost  complete  suspension  of  the  operation  of  the  municipal  electric 
light  and  power  plant,  on  account  of  the  limited  siipply  of  water  with 
which  to  run  the  turbines.  This  serious  condition  of  affairs  will  probably 
continue  for  an  indefinite  period,  as  there  seems  to  be  no  way  of  stopping 
these  leaks,  which  are  gradually  draining  the  great  lake  formed  by  the 
dam  of  its  water.  The  people  of  Austin  have  come  face  to  face  with  the 
problem  of  municipal  ownership,  and  it  is  hard  to  foretell  what  the 
solution  will  be. 

"The  project  of  constructing  a  gigantic  dam  across  the  Colorado 
river,  at  a  point  three  miles  west  of  Aiistin,  had  its  inception  in  1890,  and, 
after  considerable  agitation,  the  proposition  for  the  city  to  issue  bonds 
to  the  amount  of  ^1,400,000  to  carry  out  the  enterprise  was  voted  upon 
and  carried  by  a  big  majority,  at  a  municipal  election  held  on  May  5,  1891. 
These  bonds  were  sold,  and  the  work  of  constructing  the  dam  began. 
It  was  found  that  $1,400,000  was  not  sufficient  to  complete  the  work,  and 
in  1894  another  issue  of  $200,000  was  voted.  In  addition  to  the  proceeds 
from  the  sale  of  these  bonds,  about  $150,000  was  used  by  the  city  in 
completing  the  dam  and  constructing  the  municipal  water  works  plant 
and  electric  light  and  power  house,  making  the  total  cost  of  the  enter- 
prise about  $1,750,000.  The  $1,400,000  of  bonds  bear  five  per  cent,  and 
mature  in  40  years;  the  $200,000  issue  bears  six  per  cent,  and  also  mature 
in  40  years.     Nearly  all  of  these  bonds  are  held  in  the  east. 

''  Before  the  construction  of  the  dam  was  undertaken,  it  was  asserted 
by  competent  engineers  that  it  would  be  impossible  to  prevent  leakages, 
owing  to  the  fact  that  all  this  section  is  of  limestone  formation,  and  sink- 
holes abound  along  the  course  of  the  Colorado  river.  Despite  these 
warnings  the  great  enterprise  was  carried  out.  While  the  work  on  the 
dam  was  still  in  progress,  a  large  stream  of  water  burst  forth  a  short 
distance  below  it.  Although  it  was  thought  to  be  a  leak  at  the  time,  no 
effort  to  stop  it  was  made.  Since  then  other  leaks  have  occurred,  and  it 
is  claimed,  by  those  who  have  conducted  an  investigation,  that  a  big 
volume  of  water  is  pouring  out  from  underneath  the  masonry  work,  near 
the  center  of  the  dam.  During  the  period  from  August  14  to  September 
14,  of  the  present  year,  the  water  in  the  lake,  formed  by  the  dam,  fell  ten 

6Q 


feet,  und  thiit  this  great  fall  was  due  to  leaks  is  shuwu  by  the  fact  that  the 
volume  of  flowing  water  in  the  river  below  the  dam  is  greater  than  usual 
at  this  season  of  the  year.  In  addition  to  these  leaks,  the  city  authorities 
with  soon  have  to  contend  with  the  problem  of  cleaning  out  the  lake. 
The  water  in  the  lake  at  the  dam  was  originally  GO  feet  deep.  Soundings 
show  that  there  is  now  but  27  feet  of  water,  sand  and  sediment  from  the 
great  watershed  above  having  lilled  up  the  bed  of  the  lake  to  a  depth  of 
33  feet.  No  provision  was  made  in  the  construction  of  the  dam  for  clean- 
ing out  the  bed  of  the  lake. 

'*  There  are  three  penstocks  at  the  dam.  When  the  water  in  the  lake 
reaches  the  crest  of  the  dam  the  head  of  water  at  the  penstocks  is  IG  feet. 
The  cit}-  uses  but  one  of  these  penstocks.  It  is  estimated  that  the 
average  flow  of  the  river  is  eciuivalent  to  1,000  horse  power,  without 
making  au}-  allowance  for  evaporation  or  leakage.  It  was  estimated  that 
the  storage  of  the  waters  of  the  river,  by  the  construction  of  the  dam, 
woukl  atford  not  less  than  14,000  horse  power,  which  would  give  a  surplus 
of  12,500  horse  power,  the  amount  required  bj'  the  city  being  only  1,500. 
It  was  believed  by  the  promoters  of  the  project  that  there  would  be  no 
difficulty  in  disposing  of  this  surplus  power  to  manufacturing  concerns, 
and  that  the  city  would  derive  a  handsome  revenue  from  that  source,  but 
there  has  been  no  realization  of  these  expectations,  not  a  single  manu- 
facturing enterprise  having  been  established  here  by  reason  of  the  water 
power  advantages.  The  amount  of  water  powder  now  used  by  the  city  at 
the  dam  is  from  300  to  500  horse  power. 

' '  The  gross  receipts  derived  by  the  city  from  the  water  works  and 
electric  light  and  power  plant,  when  it  is  in  full  operation,  are  about 
8G0,000  per  year.  The  aggregate  expenses  of  operating  the  plant  are 
about  8174,000  per  j'ear,  including  the  8114,000  interest  upon  the  bonded 
debt.  Previous  to  establishing  its  own  water  works  and  electric  light 
and  power  plant,  the  city  paid  a  private  company  here  818,000  per  annum 
for  Ijetter  service  than  is  now  costing  the  tax  payers  8174,000  per  annum. 
The  present  city  tax  rate  is  2. '60k  on  8100.  Before  the  building  of  the 
dam  and  municipal  water  works  and  electric  light  and  power  plant,  the 
tax  rate  was  only  00  cents  on  $100,  sufficient  revenue  being  derived  from 
this  rate  of  taxation  to  pay  the  private  water  and  light  plant  for  their 
hj'drant  service,  street  lights,  etc. ,  and  also  interest  on  8125,000  of  bonds 
which  the  city  had  out  at  the  rate  of  ten  per  cent  interest  per  annum. 

''The  present  city  valuation  is  about  811,000.000,  which  amount  is 
much  above  the  real  value.  Before  the  establishmeut  of  this  gigantic 
municipal  enterprise,  the  property  valuation  of  the  city  was  86,000,000, 
and  with  the  tax  rate  of  00  cents  there  was  derived  sufficient  revenue  to 
meet  every  obligation.  Store  rooms  in  the  business  centre  of  the  city  that 
formerly  rented  for  8100  per  month  now  rent  for  825  to  $35  per  month. 
If  the  estimate  of  $0,000,000  of  real  valuation  for  the  city  is  correct, 
and  with  a  bonded  debt  of  81,000,000,  the  city  of  Austin  has  been  given 
a  credit  of  over  20  per  cent,  when  all  statistics  show  that  no  corporation 
is  entitled  to  over  Ave  per  cent  of  its  assessed  valuation. 

"  The  proposition  is  a  hard  one  for  the  city  authorities  to  deal  with, 

67 


and  they  are  coping  with  it  the  best  they  can  under  the  circumstances. 
It  has  been  fully  demonstrated  that  the  water  power  which  should  be 
afforded  by  the  dam  cannot  be  depended  upon,  and  steps  have  been  taken 
looking  to  the  purchase  and  installation  of  an  auxiliary  steam  plant  to 
cost  in  the  neighborhood  of  $75,000." 

The  Electrical  World  says  : 

The  city  council  of  Austin,  Texas,  has  voted  not  to  pay  interest  on 
its  $1,327,000  five  per  cent  city  water  and  light  bonds,  due  January  1 ,  1900, 
The  city  is  thus  forced  to  default  in  the  payment  of  its  quarterly  interest. 
This  measure  is  understood  to  mean  that  the  council  intends  repudiating 
the  issue. 

Representatives  of  the  eastern  holders  of  the  Austin  water  and  light 
bonds 'are  here  investigating  the  financial  condition  of  the  city,  and 
compiling  data  to  be  used  in  the  preparation  of  suits  to  be  filed  by  the 
bond  holders  in  the  federal  court  for  the  recovery  of  the  defaulted 
interest  and  principal  due  them  on  the  bonds.  The  action  of  the  city 
council,  in  seeking  to  repudiate  this  bonded  indebtedness  of  $1,500,000, 
is  being  severely  criticised  hy  the  majority  of  tax  payers  of  this  city. 
The  project  of  installing  an  auxiliary  steam  plant  at  the  electric  light  and 
power  station  here  has  been  al)audoned,  on  account  of  the  critical  condi- 
tion of  affairs  which  now  confronts  the  city. 

The  Electrical  Review  says  : 

THE    AUSTIN   DAM, 

The  unfortunate  and  fatal  failure  of  one  of  the  most  pretentious 
municipal  enterprises  ever  undertaken  in  the  United  States.  The  city 
of  Austin,  Tex.,  undertook  to  build  this  enormous  hydraulic  work, 
damming  up  the  Colorado  river  and  developing  a  power  sufficient  to 
operate  the  municipal  water  works,  municipal  electric  light  plant,  muni- 
cipal power  plant  for  the  street  railway  company,  and  municipal  plant 
for  the  production  of  power  for  sale.  The  cost  of  the  enterprise  was 
somewhat  more  than  one  million  dollars.  For  seven  years  it  has  been 
in  operation  and  its  destruction  only  calls  attention  to  the  fact  that  as  an 
enterprise  it  was  a  distinct  failure.  Outstanding  bonds  for  the  construc- 
tion of  the  dam,  amounting  to  one  million  three  hundred  thousand  dol- 
lars, are  held  by  various  investors,  and  upon  these  bonds  the  city  has 
defaulted  in  payment  of  interest  for  two  quarters.  The  city  is  still 
deeply  in  debt  from  its  dam  enterprise,  and  to-day  is  without  light, 
without  water,  without  street  cars  and  almost  without  hope  on  account  of 
the  failure  of  its  big  plaything.  There  is  little  prospect  of  the  dam  being 
rebuilt  and  the  outlook  for  the  bondholders  is  not  cheerful.  While 
deeply  sympathizing  with  the  people  of  the  unfortunate  city  in  the  catas- 
trophe that  has  overwhelmed  it  and  them,  it  is  not  unkind  to  say  that 
they  afford  at  present  a  spectacle  of  deep  interest  and  great  importance, 
which  is  urgently  recommended  to  the  studious  attention  of  every  advo- 
cate of  municipal  ownfership  of  any  sort. 

68 


City  Qovcrnment  says : 

AUSTIN'S   EXPENSIVE    "  TIX   WHISTLE." 

The  Texas  flood  is  to  be  deplored,  particnliirly  in  the  loss  of  life. 
The  calamit}',  however,  calls  national  attention  to  the  tragic  ending  of  a 
colossal  scheme  of  municipal  ownership.  The  plan  was  to  utilize  the 
14. ODD  horse  power  in  supplying  light  and  water  to  the  city  and  sell  the 
large  balance  of  power  to  manufacturers  who  would  be  induced  to  locate 
in  Austin. 

The  trained  engineers  and  the  best  business  talent  or'  the  city  pointed 
cut  the  impractical  and  impossible  conditions  surrounding  the  undertak- 
ing, but  the  politician  saw,  or  thought  he  saw,  his  great  opportunity,  and 
piished  the  plan  along.  Result :  The  prophecies  were  fulfilled,  for, 
although  nearly  82,000,000  were  expended,  nothing  was  realized  from 
the  outlay.  Municipal  ownership  on  business  principles  may  be  all 
right,  but  upon  political  foundations  is  sure  to  be  wrong. 

J.  B.  Boyd  of  Texas  says  : 

To  get  a  little  nearer  home  with  an  illustration  of  the  "Attitude  of 
Mtiuicipal  Corporations  to  the  Public,  "we  can  dwell  a  moment  over  the  gi- 
gantic municipal  investment  at  Austin.  While  the  writer  was  not  a  resi- 
dent of  your  state  during  the  "  pioneer  period  "  thereof,  he  distinctly 
remembers  reading  in  the  papers  about  the  ''  coming  Moses"  which  was 
to  rescue  Austin  from  the  slough  of  despond  and  at  one  grand  stroke 
place  her  on  the  topmost  pinnale  of  fame.  She  has  obtained  the  fame 
all  right,  but  is  practically  bankrupt,  or  expects  to  be,  e.ccording  to  state- 
ments appearing  from  time  to  time  in  the  local  papers.  There  is  hardly 
room  for  doubting  but  what  the  monthly  balance  shows  a  red  ink  balance 
on  the  wrong  side  of  the  ledger  of  some  eight  thousand  dollars,  and  that 
the  tax  rate  has  been  increased  over  150  per  cent,  but  she  has  a  muni- 
cipal plant  all  right,  and  if  she  can  possibly  raise  the  necessary  funds 
she  is  likely  to  increase  her  holdings  in  a  supplementary  investment  de- 
signed to  discount  the  annual  rainfall.  If  successful  in  raising  the  pro- 
posed funds,  she  will  have  a  little  more  municipal  plant  than  she  now 
possesses.  As  her  line  of  credit  has  already  been  extended  far  beyond 
good  financiering  practice,  it  is  not  altogether  apparent  where  the  money 
is  to  come  from.  Texas  bankers  and  financiers  with  whom  the  writer 
has  conversed  on  the  matter  seem  to  feel  that  it  is  only  a  question  of  a 
short  time  ere  the  city  of  Austin  will  become  bankrupt  through  this 
monumental  example  of  the  ''  Attitude  of  Municipal  Corporations  to  the 
Public." 

ATLANTIC  HIGHLANDS,  N.  J.,  plant,  $15,000;  operating  expenses, 
$4,900.75;  interest  at  5  per  cent.,  $750  ;  depreciation,  $750;  taxes  and 
water  rent,  $150  ;  insurance,  ^100  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $750; 
making  *7,400,  less  income  from  commercial  lights,  $2,293.56,  and  we  have 
$5,106.44,  cost  of  street  lights,  being  $75  per  lamp  per  year,  burned  2,000 
hours,  costing  .0375  per  hour  and  furnishing  533  candle  power  per  hour 
for  one  cent.     The  following  statement  has  been  printed  widely  in  papers 

G9 


advocating  municipal  ownership,  and  cited  as  an  illustration  of  the  suc- 
cess achieved  by  the  system  at  Atlantic  Highlands:  "  Including  the  pay- 
ment of  the  interest  on  the  issue  of  bonds,  the  total  amount  paid  by  the 
town  for  its  street  lighting  has  been  $1,808.27.  The  streets  are  lighted 
with  68  arc  lights,  and  the  amount  paid  by  the  town  for  street  lighting  is 
only  $26.50  per  lamp,  or  a  trifle  less  than  one-third  the  price  offered  by 
the  lowest  private  company." 

It  is  plainly  stated  in  this  article  that  the  total  amount  paid  by  the 
town  was  $1,808.27,  while  an  examination  of  the  treasurer's  books  shows 
that  $750  was  paid  for  interest  on  bonds,  $867.25  for  coal,  $1,616.60  for 
labor  and  salaries  charged  to  the  electric  department,  making  a  total  for 
these  three  items  of  $3,283.85,  not  including  any  of  the  other  expenses 
of  the  plant,  or  depreciation,  or  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds. 

ATLANTIC,  Iowa,  plant,  $40,000  ;  coal,  $1.50  per  ton  ;  operating  ex- 
penses, $7,638.97;  interest  at  5  per  cent,  $2,000;  depreciation,  $2,000;  taxes, 
insurance  and  water  rent,  $400  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $1,250  ;  mak- 
ing $13,288.97,  less  income,  $7,924.49,  and  we  have  $5,364.48,  cost  of  12 
2,000-candle  power  arc  and  160  32-candle  power  incandescent  street  lights, 
equivalent  to  47  arc  lights  burned  2,200 hours,  costing. 0518  per  hour,  and 
furnishing  386  candle  power  per  hoiir  for  one  cent. 

'  ABINGTON,  Va.,  plant,  $12,500  ;  coal,  $3. 00 per  ton;  operating  ex- 
penses, $1,800  ;  interest  at  6  percent,  $750  ;  depreciation,  $625  ;  taxes  and 
insurance,  $125  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $625  ;  making  $3,925,  less  in- 
come, $2,300,  and  we  have  cost  of  street  lights  burned  4,000  hours,  cost- 
ing .027  per  hour,  andfurnishiDg592  candlepower  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

AMES,  Iowa,  plant,  $16,844;  coal,  $1.55  per  ton;  operating  expenses, 
$7,006.70;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $1,011.84;  depreciation,  $848.20; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $168  ;  making  $9,123.74,  less  income,  $6,400,  and 
we  have  $2,729.74,  cost  "of  [street  lights  burned  1,500  hours,  costing 
.0836  per  hour,  and  furnishing  239  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

ATKIN.  Minn.,  plant,  $10,000;  operating  expenses,  $2,550;  interest 
at  six  per  cent,  $600  ;  depreciation,  $500  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  $100  ; 
making  $3,750,  less  income,  $2,700,  and  we  have  $1,050,  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .035  per  hour,  and  furnishing  343 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

ATHENS,  Ala  ,  plant,  $6,000  ;  coal,  $2  per  ton  ;  operating  expenses^ 
$1,400;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $300;  depreciation,  $300  ;  taxes  and 
insurance,  $60  ;  sinking  fund  to  meet  bonds,  $300  ;  a  total  of  $2,360, 
deducting  all  income,  $1,800,  and  we  have  $560,  for  street  lights 
burned  1,200  hours,  costing  .0233  per  hour,  and  furnishing  686  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

ANDERSON,  Ind.,  plant,  $75,000,  and  they  use  natural  gas  for 
fuel  ;    operating   expenses,   $6,000  ;    interest  at   six  per   cent,    $4,500 ; 

70 


depreciation,  $3,750  ;  taxes  aud  insurance,  >^750  ;  makino:  $15,000,  less  all 
income,  $5,000,  and  we  have  $10,0(J0,  for  street  lio:hts  burned  2,000 
hours,  costing  .0223  per  hour,  and  furnishing  DOO  candle  power  per  hour 
for  one  cent. 

ALLEGHENY,  Pa.,  plant,  $2G5,000  ;  coal,  $1  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $54. 008 ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $10,600;  depreciation, 
$13,250  ;  water  tax,  $500;  taxes  lost  on  two-thirds  cost  of  plant.  $2,000  ; 
sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $5,000  ;  making  $86,258,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  3,976  hours,  costing  .0197  per  hour,  and  furnishing  1,010  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent.  The  superintendent  from  Allegheny,  in  a 
discussion  at  New  Haven,  stated  that,  "if  New  Haven  was  getting  its 
lamps  at  $98.55  per  year,  when  the  adjustment  of  the  account  was  made 
to  correspond  with  the  difference  for  local  conditions,  that  the  price  in 
New  Haven  is  less  than  the  price  of  the  municipal  plant  at  Allegheny." 

ADRIAN,  Minn.,  plant,  $13,000  ;^  operating  expenses,  $1,819; 
interest  at  live  per  cent,  $650  ;  depreciation,  $650  ;  taxes  and  insurance, 
$130  ;  making  $3,249,  less  income,  $1,800,  and  we  have  $1,449,  cost  of 
street  lights  burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .0086  per  hour,  and  furnishing 
174  caudle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

ARLINGTON,  Minn.,  plant,  $4,000;  operating  expenses,  $1,200; 
interest  at  six  per  cent,  $240 ;  depreciation,  $200 ;  taxes  and  insurance, 
$40  ;  making  $1,680,  less  income,  $1,250,  and  we  have  $430,  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  1,200  hours,  costing  .1.895  per  hour,  aud  furnishing  134 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

AURORA,  111.,  plant,  $51,500;  coal,  $1.75  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $10,306  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $2,575  ;  depreciation,  $2,575; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $510,  making  $15,966,  cost  of  street  lights,  burned 
2,500  hours,  costing  .031  per  hour,  and  furnishing  645  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

ASHTABULA,  Ohio,  plant,  $80,000  :  coal,  $2.05 per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $15,000:  interest  at  4  per  cent,  $3,200;  depreciation,  $4,000;  taxes 
and  insurance.  $800;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $2,400  ;  making  $25,400, 
less  income,  $13,000,  and  we  have  $12,400,  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
2,000  hours,  costing  .0568  per  hour,  and  furnishing  352  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

ALEXANDRIA,  Va.,  plant  $16,000;  operating  expenses,  $5,000  ; 
interest  at  5  per  cent,  $800  ;  depreciation,  $800  ;  taxes  and  insurance, 
$160  ;  making  $0,760,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  3,750  hours,  costing 
.0195  per  hour,  and  furnishing  769  candle  power  for  one  cent. 

ALEXANDRIA,  Minn.,  plant,  $17,500;  operating  expenses, 
$2,457.09;  interest  at  6  per  cent,  $1,050;  depreciation,  $875;  taxes  and 
insurance,  $175;  making  $4,557.09,  less  income,  $2,694.06,  aud  we  have 


$1,863.03,  cost  of  street  lij^hts  burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .0828  per  hour, 
and  furnishing  241  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

BELLVUE,  Iowa,  plant,  costing  $15,000,  coal  $3.50  per  ton; 
operating  expenses,  $2,370  ;  interest  at  G  per  cent,  $900  ;  depreciation, 
$750  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  $150:  making  $4,170,  less  income,  $2,400,  and 
we  have  $1,776,  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned  3,800  hours,  costing  .0213 
per  hour,  and  furnishing  566  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

BAY  CITY.  Mich.,  plant,  $39,000,  and  coal  $1.50  per  ton  ;  operat- 
ing expenses,  $9,538.72;  interest  at  4  per  cent,  $1,560;  depreciation, 
$1,950  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  $200  ;  total,  $13,248  72,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  2,000  hours,  and  costing  .0201  per  hour,  and  furnishing  766  can- 
dle power  i>eT  hour  for  one  cent. 

The  Tribune  recently  said  : 

"  The  manner  in  which  thg  streets  of  Bay  City  are  lighted  (or  rather 
not  lighted)  has  ceased  to  be  a  subject  of  humorous  mention  and  should 
be  given  some  consideration  by  the  common  council.  The  city  has  an 
expensive  lighting  plant,  but  for  at  least  one-third  of  the  month  the 
people  who  pay  taxes  for  the  support  of  public  institutions  do  not  realize 
that  fact,  especially  if  they  have  business  which  takes  them  upon  the 
streets  at  night.  It  is  time  to  call  a  halt  and  light  the  streets  after  the 
manner  of  modern,  up-to-date  cities." 

BLOOMFIELD,  Iowa,  purchased  an  electric  plant  in  1891  for 
$14,000,  in  1896  their  dynamos  failed,  and  had  to  be  replaced  with  new 
ones  at  a  cost  of  $5,000,  making  an  outlay  of  $19,000.  They  report  that 
they  can  duplicate  the  plant  to-day  for  $9,000,  making  a  depreciation  of 
one-half  of  the  investment.  Their  incandescent  lights  are  burned  2,000 
hours,  costing  $12.96  per  year  per  lamp.  All  of  the  reports  show  that 
this  plant  has  been  a  loosing  venture. 

BLOOMINGTON,  111.,  plant,  $125,000;  coal,  $1.95  per  ton; 
operating  expenses,  $17,000  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $5,000  ;  deprecia- 
tion, $6,250;  taxes  and  insurance,  $1,000;  making  $29,250,  as  cost  of 
street  lights  burned  2,555  hours,  costing  .0366  per  hour,  and  furnishing 
540  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

BETHANY,  Mo.,  plant,  $25,000;  coal,  $3  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $2,000;  interest  at  four  and  one-half  per  cent,  $1,112  ;  depre- 
ciation, $1,250  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  $250  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds, 
$950;  making  $5,562,  less  income,  $2,500,  and  we  have  $3,062,  cost  of 
street  lights  burned  2,200  hours,  costing  .0397  per  hour,  and  furnishing 
302  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

BELMONT,  Mass.,  plant,  $16,000;  cost  per  lamp  per  year,  as  shown 
by  sworn  statements  made  to  the  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Commissioners, 
was  $121.11  for  1,200  candle  power  burned  1,478  hours,  costing  ,0812  per 

72 


hour,  and  furnishing  147  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent.  They  also 
use  2.")  candle  power  incandescent  on  the  streets,  costing  $30.28  per  year, 
only  burned  1 ,478  hours. 

BRAINTREE,  Mass.,  plant,  SG7,0r.7  ;  cost  of  a  1.200  candle  power 
lamp  per  year,  as  made  to  the  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Commissioners  of 
Massachusetts,  was  $89.91.  burned  2,800  hours,  costing  .u;i9  per  hour, 
and  furnishing  307  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent.  They  use  25 
incandescents  on  side  streets,  costing  $22.48  per  year,  burned  2,300  hours. 

BATAVIA,  N.  Y.,  plant,  $27,;")38.91  ;  coal  $1.77  per  ton ;  operating 
expenses,  ^5,113.41;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  ^LlOl.-'io:  depreciation, 
$1,37(5.94  ;  taxes,  $275  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $750  ;  making 
$8,610,90,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  3, COO  hours,  costing  .0213  per  hour, 
and  tnrnishing  938  candle  power  per  hoar  for  one  cent.  The  salary  of 
the  engineer  is  charged  to  the  water  works.  There  has  Ijeen  charged 
to  construction  $5,738.91,  but,  as  there  are  only  nine  more  lamps  in 
circuit,  it  is  evident  that  most  of  this  item  should  have  gone  to  expense 
account.     Two  armatures  were  burned  out  during  the  year. 

BANGOR,  Me.,  plant,  $40,000;  water  power,  operating  expenses, 
$6,500:  interest  at  four  per  cent.  $1,600;  depreciation,  $2,000;  taxes 
and  insurance,  $400:  making  $10,500,  cost  of  streetlights  burned  4,000 
hours,  costing  .0152  per  hour,  and  furnishing  789  candle  power  per  hour 
for  one  cent. 

The  cost  charged  for  plant  does  not  include  any  part  of  the  building, 
wheel,  pit  wheel,  or  gears  and  shafting,  or  for  the  water  power  or  repairs 
on  the  dam. 

BOWLING  GREEN,  Ky.,  plant,  $18,000:  coal,  $1.28  per  ton  ; 
operating  expenses,  $3,980.23;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $1,080  ;  deprecia- 
tion, $900;  taxes  and  insurance,  $180  ;  making  $6,140.23,  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  2,200  hours,  costing  .0387  per  hour,  and  furnishing  516 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent.  Upon  an  examination  of  the  water 
works  accounts,  we  find  that  the  superintendent's  and  bookkeeper's 
salaries,  stationery  and  interest,  were  charged  to  that  department,  and 
nothing  to  the  light  plant. 

BLUE  ISLAND,  111.,  plant,  $20,000;  lights  burned  1,875  hours, 
costing  .0451  per  hour,  and  furnishing  443  candle  power  per  hour  for  one 
•cent. 

CARTHAGE,  Ohio,  plant,  $15,000  ;  coal,  $2.00  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $2,500  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $750;  depreciation,  $750; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $150  ;  making  $4,150,  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
8,000  hours,  costing  .0288  per  hour, , and  furnishing  (i94  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

CLYDE.  Ohio,  plant,  $12,000;  coal,  $1.76  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $5,0u0  ;    interest  at  six  per  cent,   $720:    depreciation,   $600; 


taxes  and  insurance,  $120  ;  sinking  fimd  to  pay  bonds,  $(500  ;  making 
$7,040,  less  income  for  ineandescents,  $2,500,  and  we  have  $4,540,  as 
cost  of  street  lights  burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .057  per  hour,  and 
furnishing  350  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent 

COLUMBUS,  Ind,,  plant,  $11,457  ;  coal,  $1.50  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $8,493.05  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $572.85  ;  depreciation, 
$572.85;  taxes  and  insurance,  $114;  making  $4,752.75,  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0334  per  hour,  and  furnishing  598 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

CATAWISSA,  Pa.,  plant.  $10,000;  coal,  $1.00  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $2,200  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $500 :  depreciation,  $500 ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $50  ;  sinking  fund  to  meet  bonds,  ,$600  ;  making 
$3,850,  less  income,  $2,200,  and  we  have  $1,650,  as  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  4,000  hours,  costing  .0189  per  hour,  and  furnishing  1,058  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

CHARITON,  Iowa,  plant,  ^50,000  ;  coal,  $1.25  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses  from  1894  to  1900,  $40,757.75,  less  total  income  for  same  time, 
$34,379.01,  leaving  an  operating  expense,  over  receipts,  of  $6,378.74, 
averaging  $1,003.12  per  year  ;  and  interest  at  four  per  cent  ou  cost  of 
plant,  $2,000;  depreciation,  $2,500;  taxes,  $500;  making  $6,063.12,  cost 
of  street  lights,  being  for  six  five-ampere  lights  and  117  32-candle  power 
incandescent  lights  used  in  streets,  equivalent  to  46  1,200-candle  poAver 
lamps,  and  costing  $131.80  per  year  per  lamp,  burned  2,500  hours,  costing 
.0527  per  hour,  and  furnishing  227  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

The  cost  being  so  high,  we  applied  to  the  city  clerk  for  his  correction 
of  the  figures,  showing  operating  expenses  each  year  since  1894.  and  the 
income  received  for  the  same  time,  and  the  amounts  given  are  those 
certified  to  by  him. 

He  also  said  that  a  judgment  of  $19,000  was  obtained  against  the 
city,  but  they  had  paid  this  off.  He  did  not  explain  what  the  judgment 
was  for,  or  how  it  was  obtained. 

CRAWFORDSVILLE,  Ind.  So  much  had  been  said  about  this 
plant,  and  the  officials  refusing  to  give  any  infoi'mation  or  allow  any  ex- 
amination, it  was  decided  to  make  a  full  canvass  of  the  city  and  inter- 
view its  most  prominent  citizens  who  were  only  interested  in  the  plant 
as  tax  payers. 

A  strange  condition  of  affairs  was  disclosed.  The  first  one  approached 
was  asked  if  they  had  a  municipal  plant  in  that  city,  and  his  answer  was, 
''We  do  own  our  light  plant,  but  if  we  did  not  we  would  not,  for, 
in  my  opinion,  it  will  bankrupt  any  city."  Another  being  asked  if  the 
plant  was  not  a  success;  his  answer  was,  "So  far  as  the  cost  of  plant 
and  street  lights  is  concerned,  the  venture  is  certainly  a  fearful  failure. 
The  plant  can  be  duplicated  to-day  with  new  apparatus  for  $30,000  less 
than  it  has  cost  the  taxpayers." 

One  citizen,  when  asked  about  cost  of  the  electric  plant,  answered, 

74 


"  It  is  impossible  to  procure  facts,  the  ring  ■wlio  manage  the  citj'  finding 
the  electric  plant  in  the  past  giving  more  milk  than  any  other  teat  acces- 
6il:)le,  refuse  to  make  public  any  information." 

Another,  when  interviewed,  said,  "The  ring  that  initiated  the  enter- 
prise assured  the  taxpayers  that  the  maximum  outlay  would  in  no  con- 
tingency exceed  .$32,000,  but  afterwai-ds  admitted  that  it  had  cost 
$80,000,  while  the  cost  now  exceeds  .^105,000." 

One  citizen,  when  asked  if  the  profits  on  commercial  lights  did  not 
pay  the  entire  expenses  of  running  the  plant,  answered,  "After  deduct- 
ing the  entire  income  for  such  lights  and  adding  interest,  depreciation, 
operating  expenses  and  salaries,  the  street  lights  cost  the  tax  payers  $85 
per  lamp  per  year."  One  prominent  tax  payer,  when  asked  if  the  profits 
of  the  electric  plant  were  not  lessening  the  taxes  very  materially,  said, 
"  No:  the  expense  of  keeping  the  plant  running  bids  fair  to  become  an 
unendurable  tax,  and  for  the  past  two  years  pressure  has  been  urgent  to 
have  the  plant  sold,  but  the  amount  of  investment  above  honest  cost  is 
so  great  that  no  private  company  will  make  an  oflt'er  that  the  citj'  can 
bring  itself  to  come  down  to." 

When  one  citizen  was  asked  why  the  tax  payers  did  not  have  experts 
examine  and  appraise  the  plant,  answered,  "Practical  constructors 
offered,  two  years  ago,  to  duplicate  the  plant  for  $50,000.  The  fact  is, 
we  are  much  in  the  condition  of  the  man  who  had  the  wolf  by  the  tail, 
afraid  to  either  hold  ou  or  let  go.  My  impression  is,  however,  that  so 
burdensome  is  the  matter,  the  city  will  ere  long  make  some  radical 
change,  feeling  that  it  can  scarcely  be  the  loser  by  any  release  from  pres- 
ent status."  The  lights  were  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0425  per  hour, 
and  furnishing  470  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

If  space  permitted  a  large  number  of  of  other  interviews,  showing 
the  same  feeling  and  results  could  be  given. 

No  wonder  the  local  paper  said,  ''What  our  electric  lights  coat  is 
something  past  finding  out,  at  least  so  far  no  one  hag  been  able  to  find  out. 
For  a  long  time  we  took  it  for  granted  that  everything  was  all  right,  but 
a  little  investigation  goes  to  show  that  everything  is  all  wrong." 

CHICAGO,  111.,  plant,  $1,155,000;  coal,  $2.50  per  ton  :  operating  ex- 
penses, $157,486.58;  interest  at  4  per  cent,  $40,200;  depreciation,  $57,750; 
taxes,  $11,000  ;  making  $272,436.53,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  4,000 
hours,  costing  .0235  per  hour  and  furnishing  851  candle  power  per  hour 
for  one  cent. 

The  Western  Fjleetrician  of  Chicago,  an  authority  upon  the  electri- 
cal business  of  that  city,  says : 

It  is  the  old  story.  City  officers  and  commercial  electric-light  com- 
panies make  their  calculations  and  estimates  on  different  bases.  For  in- 
stance, in  Mr.  Ellicott's  tables  there  is  no  allowance  whatever  for  depre- 
ciation. Instead,  the  city  electrician  charges  to  operating  expense  such 
amounts  as  were  necessary  to  renew  any  part  of  the  plants.  He  con- 
tends that  ''  the  ordinary  depreciation  of  the  plants  is  taken  care  of  in 

75 


the  annual  expenses  of  maintaining  the  lights,  and  an  examination  of  the 
plants  -will  show  that  the  application  of  a  further  and  theoretical  per 
cent  for  depreciation  is  not  necessary  or  warranted  in  order  to  obtain  the 
true  cost  to  the  city."  But  is  this  a  prudent  and  sound  position?  Can 
the  "  true  cost  "  be  arrived  at  by  such  an  assumption  ?  An  examination 
of  the  city  plants  would  show  that  they  are  equipped  with  new  or  compar- 
atively new  machinery.  There  is  now  comparatively  little  expense  for 
renewals,  because  such  a  large  amount  of  new  equipment  has  been  pur- 
chased within  the  last  two  or  three  years.  But  how  will  the  case  stand 
ten  or  twenty  years  from  now?  Will  the  present  dynamos  and  lamps  be 
still  in  service,  and,  if  they  are,  will  they  be  regarded  as  economical,  up- 
to-date  apparatus,  or  as  obsolete  ?  The  inventory  shows  that  the  city 
electric-light  plants,  aside  from  land  and  buildings,  are  valued  at  about 
$1,000,000.  Ten  per  cent  of  that  set  aside  for  depreciation  will  add  at 
once  $34.56  to  the  cost  of  operating  and  maintaining  the  2,893  arc  lamps 
figured'in  Mr.  Ellicott's  tables,  bringing  the  cost  up  to  $90.40  a  lamp.  If  a 
five  per  cent  basis  of  depreciation  be  accepted  (and  managers  of  plants 
will  agree  that  that  is  a  small  percentage  to  set  aside  to  keep  the  plant  in- 
tact and  economically  up  to  date  for  an  indefinite  period),  the  cost  of  op- 
eration and  maintenance  is  increased  from  $55.93  to  $73.21. 

Take  the  matter  of  taxes.  The  real  and  personal  property  repre- 
sented in  the  Chicago  municipal  lighting  plants  is  $1,155,000.  The  city 
receives  no  revenue  in  taxation  from  this  property.  The  plant  is  neces- 
sary for  the  lighting  of  the  streets,  so  that  if  the  city  did  not  own  it 
somebody  else  would  and  would  pay,  say  $11,000  in  taxes.  This  loss  in 
revenue  is  part  of  what  the  cit3'  pays  for  its  lights,  and  amounts  to  $3.80 
a  lamp.  Added  to  the  $73.21  above  (taking  the  five  per  cent  depreciation) , 
the  cost  of  operation  and  maintenance  is  now  $77.01. 

Then,  too,  is  it  not  fair  to  assume  that  the  tax  payers'  money  put  into 
these  plants  is  worth  something  ?  Should  we  not  allow  interest  on  the 
investment  ?  Does  any  private  person  invest  money  in  a  business  with- 
out charging  against  that  business  the  minimum  interest  that  his  capital 
would  bring  in  any  event  ?  If  the  city  borrows  money  to  build  electric 
light  plants  does  it  not  pay  interest  on  the  bonds  ?  The  justice  of  this 
charge  seems  to  be  self-evident.  Let  us  assume,  then,  a  '6h  per  cent  rate 
of  interest  on  the  inventoried  investment  of  $1,150,000.  That  is  $40,425 
per  annum,  or  $13.97  a  lamp.  This  increases  the  annual  cost  of  each 
lamp  to  $90.98. 

Passing  over  the  free  water  of  the  city  plants,  insurance  and  other 
items  that  might  be  enumerated,  it  will  be  evident  that  Mr.  Ellicott's 
total  cost  per  lamp  of  $55.93  is  increased,  by  taking  into  account  addi- 
tional elements  of  cost  that  seem  to  be  perfectly  just,  fair  and  reasonable, 
to  $90.98.  When  a  manufacturer's  profit  is  added  and  tlie  other  missing 
items  are  accounted  for,  it  is  seen  that  the  central  station  price  of  $108  a 
lamp  is  not  excessive.  Mr.  Ellicot  figures  labor,  material,  maintenance 
and  oflBce  salaries.  What  have  been  added  ?  Depreciation  (five  per  cent 
only,  with  no  account  of  depreciation  in  buildings),  taxes  and  interest  on 
investment.     The  cost  of  water  and  insurance  is  still  to  be  included. 

76 


Surely  there  is  nothing  unreasonable  iu  the  conchision  that  the  ''  true 
cost"  of  a  municipal  arc  light  in  Chicago,  tigured  on  an  equitable  basis, 
is  $92  a  year  or  more,  rather  than  85G. 

It  is  with  no  desire  to  indulge  iu  mere  captious  criticism  that  the 
Western  J^lev/rician  points  out  what  it  believes  to  be  the  more  rational 
method  of  arriving  at  the  cost  of  municipal  arc  lighting.  Nor  is  the 
question  of  the  proprietj-  of  the  citj-  lighting  its  own  streets  now  under 
discussion.  It  is  perfectly  well  known  that  the  dei)artmeutof  electricity 
is  ably  managed  and  that  the  city  of  Chicago  has  no  more  honest,  capa- 
ble and  zealous  officer  than  Edward  B.  EUicott.  But,  considering  merely 
the  cost  of  arc  lighting  in  Chicago,  we  have  endeavored  to  show  that  it 
is  fair  to  include  elements  of  cost  other  than  those  given  in  the  report, 
and  that,  in  consequence,  the  "  true  cost,"  based  entirelj^  on  the  figures 
given,  Is  considerably  over  $90  a  lamp. 

CONNEAUT,  Ohio,  plant,  $22,500;  operating  expenses.  $4,022.52; 
interest  at  five  per  cent.  $1,125.05;  depreciation,  $1,125.05  ;  taxes.  $225  ; 
sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $1,000;  making  $7,497.02,  less  incomp, 
!f5,044.G2,  and  we  have  $2,45;^,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,000  hours, 
costing  .0245  per  hour,  and  furnishing  489  candle  power  per  hour  for  one 
cent. 

CHAMBERSBTJRG,  Pa.,  plant,  $40,000:  operating  expenses, 
$14,000;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $1,C00;  depreciation,  $2,000;  taxes 
and  insurance,  $400;  sinking  fund  to  paj' bonds,  $1,000  ;  making  $19,000, 
less  income,  $9,800,  and  we  have  $9,2u0,  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
4.000  hours,  costing  .028  per  hour,  and  furnishing  869  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

COLUMBIA  CITY,  Ind.,  plant,  $23,500';  coal,  $2.10  per  ton; 
operating  expenses,  $6,500  ;  interest  at  six  per  cent.  $1,410  ;  depreciation, 
$1,175;  taxes  and  insurance.  $235  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $1,175  ; 
making  $10,485,  less  income,  $5,500,  and  we  have  $4,985,  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  8,000  hours,  costing  .0839  per  hour,  and  furnishing  589 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

COUNCIL  GROVE.  Kan.,  plant,  $7,000;  burned  lights  1,875 
hours,  costing  .0779  per  hour,  furnishing  154  candle  power  per  hour  for 
one  cent. 

CHICOPEE.  Mass.,  plant,  $98,950;  use  1,200  candle  power  lamps, 
costing,  as  shown  l)y  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Commissioners,  $109.74  per 
year  per  lamp,  burned  8,000  hours,  costing  .0365  per  hour,  and  furnishing 
828  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

DECATUR,  111.,  plant,  $50,000;  coal,  $1.25  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $7,000  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $2,500  ;  depreciation  at  five 
per  cent,  $2,500  ;  taxes  aud  insurance,  $500  ;  making  $11,500.  cost  of 
street  lights  burned  2,100  hours,  costing  .085  per  hoiir,  aud  furnishing 
571  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

77 


In  the  above,  only  five  per  cent  is  charged  for  depreciation.  The 
mayor,  -when  asked  regarding  the  depreciation,  answered,  "If  an  allow- 
ance of  ten  per  cent  was  made  on  the  cost  of  the  plant  to  keep  it  in 
repair,  and  another  ten  per  cent  on  account  of  depreciation,  the  charge 
wonld  not  be  too  heavy." 

The  local  paper  in  Decatur  says  : 

' '  The  municipal  lighting  is  a  snare  and  delusion.  While  the  system  of 
book-keeping  in  the  clerk's  office  shows  an  annual  expense  account  of 
$5,458,  the  actual  cost  of  these  lights  is  about  $12,458." 

DETROIT,  Midi.,  is  conceded  to  be  the  best  municipal  plant  in  the 
United  States,  and,  when  the  system  was  adopted,  the  tax  payers  were 
told  that  the  offer  made  by  the  private  company  would  be  "  cut  in  two," 
and  that  laborers  would  have  "better  pay  and  shorter  hours."  These  were 
the  promises  and  assumptions  made  to  induce  the  tax  payers  to  consent 
to  the  adoption  of  the  system.  Experience  is  a  good,  but  often  an 
expensive  teacher,  and  the  people  of  Detroit  are  realizing  the  fact.  In 
1893,  the  private  company  offered  to  make  a  contract  for  ten  j^ears,  at  an 
average  price  of  $102.50  per  lamp  per  year.  Those  advocating  municipal 
ownership  claimed  they  could  "  cut  this  price  in  two  "  ;  therefore,  to  do 
this,  they  must  produce  the  lights  for  $51.10  per  lamp.  The  report  made 
by  the  authorities  in  1897  stated  that  the  operating  expenses  were  $G4.19 
per  lamp,  and  the  1898  report  makes  operating  expenses  $51.85.  If 
taxes,  insurance,  interest  at  four  per  cent,  and  depreciation  at  only  five 
per  cent,  were  added  to  the  cost  as  given  by  the  city  for  operating 
expenses,  it  would  make  the  cost  for  1897,  $106.30,  while  for  1898  it  would 
be  $94.17  per  lamp.  In  above  figures,  nothing  is  allowed  for  a  sinking 
fund  ;  they  have  $650,000  in  bonds  outstanding.  It  is  well  known  that, 
with  thirty-year  bonds,  one-thirtieth  of  the  amount  must  be  provided 
for  each  j'^ear,  and  that  this  item  is  as  much  a  part  of  cost  as  the  labor  or 
coal  account.  In  the  case  of  Detroit,  $21,666.66  per  year  must  be 
provided  to  meet  these  bonds  as  they  mature.  This  would  add  to  the 
cost  of  lamps  in  1897,  $13.85  per  lamp,  making  a  total  for  that  year 
$120.21  per  lamp,  and  for  1898  it  would  add  yll.90  per  light,  making  the 
total  for  that  year,  $106.07.  It  will  be  seen  that  cost  for  1898  was  $12.34 
less  than  it  was  in  1897.  How  was  this  reduction  accomplished?  By 
j)utting  the  men  on  a  salary,  and  not  allowing  them  anything  for  over 
time  ;  also  reducing  the  number  of  men,  and  requiring  those  left  not 
only  to  do  the  work  of  men  discharged,  but  caring  for  180  additional 
lights. 

In  1897  they  burned  1,564  arc  lamps,  and  employed  30  men  to  trim 
and  care  for  them,  while  in  1898  they  compelled  26  men  to  trim  and  care 
for  1,744  lights ;  this  caused  a  strike  of  the  trimmers,  and  lamps  were  out 
for  4,292  hours.  In  1897  they  employed  six  engineers  and  seven  firemen, 
while  in  1898  they  only  had  five  engineers  and  six  firemen,  and  in  1897 
the  seven  firemen  handled  15,082,230  pounds  of  coal,  while  in  1898  the 
six  firemen  were  compelled  to  handle  17,075,525  pounds  of  coal,  showing 
that,  notwithstanding  the  business  required  2,043,395  pounds  more  of 


coal  in  1898  than  in  1897,  they  forced  six  men  not  only  to  handle  what 
seven  men  handled  the  j^ear  before,  but  2,043,395  pound  additional,  and  in 
1899the8ixmen  were  compelled  to  handleS, 184, 200  pounds  more  coal  than 
was  handled  by  the  seven  men  in  1897.  In  this  way,  they  reduced  the 
cost  per  lamp  S10.30  in  1898,  while  they  only  made  a  reduction  of  82.04 
in  all  the  other  branches.  In  1899  they  made  a  reduction  of  .*•">. 39  per 
lamp,  s3.29  of  which  was  taken  from  the  men's  wa<res  and  82.10  from  the 
other  departments.  This  shows  that  nearly  all  of  the  reduction  for  the 
past  three  years  has  been  all'ected  by  takiufj^  it  out  of  its  emiiloyes'  watres. 

The  plant  has  only  been  runniujjj  since  April.  189o.  Now  the  lighting 
commissioners  say  some  of  the  apparatus  must  be  changed  for  larger 
machines.  This  means  selling  the  present  apparatus  as  second-hand  and 
old  style,  which  will  not  bring  50  per  cent  of  its  cost.  The}'  call  for  an 
appropriation  of  838,000  for  this  exchange.  How  much  of  this  is  a  dead 
loss  ? 

They  have  charged  to  depreciation,  the  past  four  years,  $21,295.11 
per  year  Suppose  that  amount  is  charged  everj'  year  for  38  years,  then 
you  only  have  8809.214.  while  the  cost  of  plant  as  given  is  8813,803,  besides 
no  provision  is  made  for  a  sinking  fund  to  pay  the  bonds  of  8050.000. 
Sufficient  depreciation  must  be  charged  so  that  this  fund  will  equal  the 
cost  of  {)lant  in  a  certain  number  of  years,  and  experience  has  shown 
that  the  apparatus  will  not  last  over  ten  or  15  years. 

Cincinnati  paj-s  a  private  company  884.90  per  lamp  per  yeai',  for  a 
2,000  candle  power  lamp  burned  every  night  all  night,  and,  without 
assuming  any  risk  or  lial)ilit3',  procures  her  lights  .f21.17  per  lamp  less 
than  it  costs  the  citj'  of  Detroit  to  produce  them  under  the  most  favor- 
able conditions.  The  tax  paj'ers  of  Detroit  were  given  theory  when 
their  plant  was  installed.  Now  theory  is  utterly  destroyed  by  the  stern 
facts  of  experience.  Instead  of  producing  the  lights  at  half  the  price 
offered  by  the  private  company,  the  reports  show  that  it  has  cost  an 
average  of  810. ()4  per  lamp  more  than  it  would  have  cost  if  a  contract 
had  lieen  made  with  the  private  companj',  and  this  on  the  basis  of  only 
five  per  cent  for  depreciation. 

The  Detroit  Tritmni'  saj's  . 

"  The  city  finds  itself  with  an  elaborate  white  elephant  on  its  hands. 
The  people  cannot  fail  to  realize  that  the  creation  of  the  new  department 
has  simplj'  increased  the  opportunity  for  more  wrangling  in  the  city 
government  and  the  facility  with  which  private  parties  ma}'  control 
public  affairs  to  suit  themselves." 

I)(  Iroit  Free  Pre/tft  says  : 

In  accordance  with  his  announcement  at  the  recent  meeting  of  the 
Public  Lighting  Commission  Wednesdaj- evening,  William  A.  Livingstone 
placed  his  resignation  as  a  member  of  the  board  in  the  hands  of  Mayor 
Maj-bury  j-esterday  morning. 

While  Mr  Livingstone  refuses  absolutely  to  discuss  his  action,  it  is 
a  well  known  fact  among  his  friends  that  he  has  the  utmost  confidence  in 
the  al)ility  of  Secretary'  Ford  Starring,  and,  believing  him  to  be  the  man 
for  the  place,  was  determined  to  show   his   loj-alty   by   resigning   his 

79 


commissionership  in  case  Starring  shoiild  be  forced  to  decline  a, 
reappointment.  And  so,  realizing  that  the  labor  element,  so  long  arrayed 
against  Starring,  was  on  the  eve  of  victory,  he  resigned. 

It  is  considered  probable  that  Commissioners  John  Miner  and  C.  H. 
Kitter  will  follow  Mr.  Livingstone's  example  at  an  early  date.  Thus  it 
is  seen  that  the  Public  Lighting  Commission  happy  family  is  no  longer 
intact.  The  annual  efforts  of  the  labor  organizations,  set  forth  since  the 
lighting  plant  was  established,  to  obtain  a  foothold  there,  have  been  at 
last  successful.  Last  fall  Commissioner  E.  H.  Fyfe,  scenting  trouble 
from  afar,  tendered  his  resignation  and  gracefully  withdrew.  Other 
commissioners  would  have  followed  him,  but  held  on,  hoping  that 
trouble  could  be  averted. 

The  initial  point  of  the  attacking  party  was  the  secretary,  whose 
position  they  believed  to  be  the  keystone  to  their  success.  Last  year 
Secretary  Starring  maintained  a  ten  weeks'  fight  to  retain  his  position. 
This  year  he  decided  that  such  a  fight  was  anything  but  pleasant  to  him- 
self, and,  to  say  the  least,  would  be  annoying  to  his  friends  on  the  com- 
mission. He  did  not  regard  the  position  worth  all  that  he  and  his 
friends  would  have  to  go  through  to  retain  it.  Last  Tuesday  he  obtained 
the  permission  of  a  majoritj'  of  the  commissioners  to  call  a  meeting  of 
the  commission,  and  on  Wednesday  night  they  got  together. 

SECKET   MEETING. 

The  meeting  was  a  secret  one,  and  though  the  ofiice  of  the  commis- 
sion was  besieged  by  newspaper  men,  none  was  permitted  entrance,  or 
given  the  slightest  idea  of  what  was  going  on. 

It  was  learned  yesterday,  however,  that  Secretary  Starring  notified 
the  commissioners  that,  rather  than  subject  them  to  the  annoyance  they 
had  gone  through  in  the  past  in  electing  him,  he  would  withdraw  his 
name  from  the  race  for  the  secretaryship.  While  some  of  the  commis- 
sioners were  ready  to  stand  by  the  secretary,  it  looked  as  if  there 
would  be  a  tie  vote  of  Commissioners  Ritter.  Miner  and  Livingstone  for, 
and  Commissioners  Simons,  Ingram  and  Carhartt  against.  Starring, 
therefore,  insisted  on  withdrawing  his  name. 

CARHAETT'S   IDEAS. 

Commissioner  Carhartt  embraced  the  opportunity  to  say  that  he  was 
thoroughly  imbued  with  the  idea  that  the  only  way  to  run  a  business  was 
in  harmony  with  the  rules  and  regulations  of  organized  labor,  and  that, 
as  he  represented  that  class  as  a  commissioner,  he  would  do  everything 
in  his  power  to  unionize  the  plant  in  the  fullest  acceptance  of  the  word. 
He  said  that  he  believed  that  not  onlj^  should  all  employes  belong  to 
unions,  but  that  the  union  label  should  be  prominent  on  everything,  and 
that  all  supplies  should  be  purchased  under  the  approval  of  labor 
organizations. 

The  other  commissioners  had  but  little  to  say,  remarking  that  such 
a  topic  was  inopportune.  One  commissioner,  however,  expressed  his 
disapproval  of  the  plan. 

80 


stareixg's  statement. 

Secretary  Starring  said  last  nio^ht : 

"  I  foresaw  a  repetitiou  of  the  tight  that  was  made  against  me  hist 
year.  At  that  time  certain  charges  were  made  against  me  in  behalf  of 
organized  labor,  setting  forth  that  1  was  antagonistic  to  it.  The  charges 
■were  not  proved  before  the  commissioners,  and  I  was  reappointed. 

"  There  are,  however,  half  a  dozen  men,  who  were  prominent  in  the 
strike  against  the  commission  by  the  trimmers  in  April,  !8;)8,  who,  failing 
to  get  emploj-ment,  have  been  acting  as  agitators,  and  kept  the  sentiment 
against  me  stirred  up.  It  is  well  known  that  I  am  not  antagonistic  to 
organized  labor,  and  I  would  be  willing,  if  intrusted  with  the  emploj'- 
ment  of  labor  at  the  lighting  plant,  to  give  preference  to  union  men,  all 
things  being  etpial,  and  the  business  of  the  city  as  well  subserved. 

"I  have  maintained  that  the  position  of  the  commission  has  been 
right— that  the  members  hud  no  authority  to  delegate  any  of  the  powers 
vested  in  them,  as  representatives  of  the  city  of  Detroit,  to  any  person 
or  organization.  The  taking  of  such  power  from  the  commission  and 
placing  it  in  the  control  of  organized  labor  is  a  question  that  should  be 
passed  on  by  the  voters  at  the  polls,  in  a  manner  similar  to  that  author- 
izing the  issuance  of  city  bonds,  etc. 

CARHARTT  REPBESENTS  ORGANIZED  LABOR. 

"  The  mayor  favors  organized  labor  at  the  public  lighting  plant,  and 
appointed  Commissioner  Carhartt,  the  representative  of  such  organiza- 
tions. Mr.  Carhartt's  position  in  the  matter  is  set  forth  in  the  following 
extract  from  a  letter  from  him  to  me,  dated  December  11,  181)9 : 

"  '  Of  course,  you  are  aware,  Mr.  Starring,  that  my  position  on  the 
Public  Lighting  Commission  is  a  unique  ore.  My  own  personality  does 
not  enter  into  the  matter  at  all.  I  was  appointed  to  represent  organized 
labor,  and,  while  no  promises  have  been  made  or  asked,  the  wishes  of 
organized  labor,  so  long  as  they  are  compatible  with  what  I  believe  is  to 
be  for  the  best  interests  of  all  concerned,  will  be  recognized.' 

"  With  other  commissioners  in  harmony  with  Mr.  Carhartt's  views, 
as  I  learned,  for  the  first  time,  at  the  meeting  Wednesday  night,"  con- 
tinued Mr.  Starring,  "  and  with  the  probability  of  a  number  of  my  old 
associates  being  deposed,  because  of  objections  from  organized  labor, 
the  position  of  secretary  would  have  been  an  unpleasant  one,  and  I  am 
more  than  ever  satistied  with  my  refusal  to  be  a  candidate  for  the 
position."  • 

NO   ONE   SEEMED   GLAD. 

A  visit  to  the  lighting  plant  yesterday  found  groups  of  employes 
discussing  the  new  condition  of  affairs.  No  one  was  found  who  expressed 
gladness  at  the  prospect  of  having  the  plant  unionized.  In  fact,  it  was 
discovered  that  at  least  ten  of  the  workmen  had  withdrawn  from  the 
electrical  workers'  union  during  the  last  year,  for  reasons  entirely 
personal  between  them  and  the  union.  Some  of  these  did  not  wish  their 
names  mentioned,   l)ut  said  freely  that  they  were  blacklisted  by  the 

81 
(6) 


union,  and  in  time  would,  at  the  request  of  the  union,  be  forced  from 
their  positions  to  make  room  for  more  loyal  members  of  the  union. 

EXTRA  EXPENSE  PROBABLE. 

One  of  the  trimmers  said  it  was  all  off  with  the  introduction  of  the 
long  burning  inclosed  arc  lamp,  and  that  the  force  of  trimmers  would 
soon  be  increased  by  about  ten  men,  adding  to  the  expense  of  that 
department  over  $7,000  per  year.  This  is  one  of  the  most  expensive 
departments  of  the  plant,  and  an  attempt  at  economy  in  it  two  years  ago 
was  the  cause  of  the  trimmers'  strike. 

Public  Policy  says : 

TRUE    AND   ENTIRE    COSTS   NOT    STATED. 

An  examination  of  the  report  by  intelligent  but  unsympathetic  eyes 
disclosed  the  fact  that  the  cost  given  as  the  cost  per  lamp  of  the  public 
lighting  did  not  include  the  payment  of  interest  an  the  $600,000  of  bonds 
issued  on  behalf  of  the  plant,  a  provision  for  a  sinking  fund  to  retire  the 
bonds,  proper  allowances  for  depreciation,  insurance  against  accidents  of 
any  kind,  taxes  relinquished  and  for  taxes  collected  and  invested  in  the 
plant  to  cover  excess  cost  of  construction.  Gradually,  as  the  years  have 
passed,  some  of  these  omissions  have  been  recognized  and  a  partial  pro- 
vision for  these  items  has  been  estimated  for  and  included  in  a  theoreti- 
■cal  statement  of  the  cost  of  lighting.  We  b&j  theoretical,  because  the 
amounts  estimated  have  never  been  withdrawn  from  the  general  fund 
and  placed  in  a  separate  fund  devoted  to  the  purpose  for  which  the  esti- 
mate was  made. 

TEE   FIRST   BREAK. 

The  theory  of  getting  something  for  nothing  by  getting  rid  of  highly 
paid  corporation  officials  soon  began  to  produce  its  legitimate  results. 
Business  men  with  large  interests  of  their  own  to  manage  soon,  found 
they  could  not  afford  to  subject  themselves  to  the  demands  made  upon 
their  time  by  the  interests  of  the  public  lighting  commission.  They  dis- 
covered that  they  were  not  dealing  with  a  subject  calling  for  the  sacri- 
fices demanded  by  patriotism  or  ethical  sentiments.  They  found  they  had 
only  a  plain  business  proposition  to  deal  with,  was  to  show  by  the  muni- 
cipal ownership  and  operation^jof  the  public  lighting  plant  that  they  could 
save  money  for  the  tax  payers.  They  found  that  one  important  item  in  the 
saving  was  their  own  work  done  for  nothing.  They  found,  in  order  that 
tax  payers  might  get  something  for  nothing,  someone  had  to  give  some- 
thing for  nothing,  and  that  someone  was  themselves.  They  tired  of 
their  task  and  one  by  one  they  dropped  out  of  the  commission. 

A   BUSINESS   PROPOSITION. 

Working  for  nothing  or  working  for  less  than  the  service  will  com- 
mand elsewhere  is  not  a  sound  business  proposition.  The  commission 
and  Mr.  Dow  had  to  meet  this  contingency.  It  was  met  by  Mr.  Dow 
choosing  to  become  one   of    the  highly  paid  corporation  officials,  the 

82 


niiinicipnl  enterprise  was  iutended  to  destroy,  rather  than  to  remain  a 
poorly  paid  public  servant,  beset  by  the  criticisms  and  claims  of  num- 
berless politicians,  whose  only  idea  of  the  service  of  the  public  lij^hting 
plant  was  its  usefulness  as  a  '"  pie  counter." 

SECRETARY  STARRING  AND  THE  TAXPAYERS. 

Mr.  Dow  was  succeeded  by  Mr.  Starring,  who  has  fought  with  a  sin- 
cerity and  ability  in  value  far  beyond  the  compensation  he  received  to 
demonstrate  the  economic  and  financial  efficiency  of  the  Detroit  public 
lighting  plant.  His  efforts  were  for  the  benefit  of  tax  payers.  But  each 
individual  taxpaj'er  was  in  business  for  himself — conducting  his  business 
on  business  principles,  taking  care  to  get  full  value  for  every  service  he 
rendered  or  commoditj'  parted  with.  They  were  not  giving  something  for 
nothing.  Their  separate  individual  interest  ill  the  public  lighting  plant,  or 
what  it  was  possible  for  it  to  save  for  them,  was  so  small  they  could  not  af- 
ford to  give  their  valuable  time  to  keep  themselves  correctlj^  informed  as  to 
the  diffiiculties  met  with  in  its  management  and  the  results.  They  valued 
the  time  it  would  cost  them  to  know  the  merits  of  the  contentions  between 
Mr.  Starring  and  his  opponents  and  to  sustain  him  worth  more  than  what 
they  could  save  by  it,  and,  as  they  do  not  think  it  a  good  business  proposi- 
tion to  give  a  greater  for  a  lesser  value,  they  left  him  to  meet  the  fate  that 
has  now  arrived. 

ALIi   HOPE    OF    SUCCESS   GONE. 

All  hope  for  the  Detroit  public  lighting  plant  ever  l)ecoming  a  suc- 
cessful business  proposition  must  now  be  abandoned.  When  a  plant  is 
operated  for  the  benefit  of  tax-eaters,  taxpayers  become  slaves.  The 
only  public  benefit  that  can  be  derived  from  the  present  condition  of  the 
Detroit  public  lighting  plant  is  that  of  a  warning  to  other  cities  contem- 
plating such  enterprises  to  abandon  them  before  it  is  too  late.  This  is 
the  warning  given  by  Boston's  municipal  manufacturing  industries  to 
Pittsburg  and  all  American  municipalities.  It  is  the  warning  given  by 
the  closing  of  the  Chicago  electrical  repair  shops  some  two  years  ago. 

There  has  not  been  a  year  during  its  existence  that  the  jmblic  light- 
ing of  Detroit  supplied  from  its  own  ))lant^ha8  not  cost  tax  payers  more 
than  the  same  service  would  have  cost  them  under  contract  with  a  pri- 
vate corporation.  There  will  never  be  such  a  year.  The  best  disposition 
the  cit3'  of  Detroit  can  make  of  this  plant  is  to  follow  the  example  of 
Philadelphia  and  lease  it  to  a  private  corporation  to  be  operated  under 
Contract. 

DANVERS,  Mass.,  plant.  .$45,174  ;  use  a  1,200  candle  power  lamp, 
costing,  as  stated  by  the  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Commissioners  of  the  state, 
$55. 87, burned  1,743  hours,  costing  .083  per  hour,  and  furnishing  375  can- 
dle power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

DANVILLE,  Va.,  plant,  i!!l8,000  ;  Vmilding  and  water  power  leased 
of  private  company  for  which  they  pay  $15  per  j'ear  per  horse  power  ;  op- 
erating expenses,  $5,000  ;  interest  at  4  per  cent,    $720  ;    depreciation, 

S3 


$900  ;  taxes,  $180,  making  $6,800,  less  income,  $1,200,  and  we  have  $5,600 
cost  of  street  lights  burned  4,000  hours,  costing  .0155  per  hour,  and 
furnishing  774  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

The  building  in  which  their  dynamos  were  located  burned,  destroy- 
ing everything  and  entailing  a  loss  of  $9,000  and  no  insurance.  This 
item  is  not  included  in  above  calculation  of  cost.  The  superintendent's 
salary  is  charged  to  the  general  expense  account  and  not  in  the  electric 
expenses. 

DAWSON,  Ga.,  plant,  $12,000  ;  coal,  $2.80  per  ton  ;  operating  ex- 
penses, $3,500  ;  interest  at  4  per  cent,  $480  ;  depreciation,  $600  ;  taxes 
and  insurance,  $120  ;  sinking  fund  to  meet  bonds,  $500  ;  total,  $5,200,  as 
cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0464  per  hour,  and 
furnishing  258  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

DUNKIRK,  N.  Y.,  plant,  $25,000  ;  coal,  $1.30  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $5,000;  interest  at  4  per  cent,  $1,000  ;  depreciation,  $1,250  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $250,  making  $7,500,  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
3,000  hours,  costing  .0263  per  hour,  and  furnishing  760  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

ELBERTON,Ga.  .plant,  $22,000;  water  power;  operating  expenses, 
$2,700;  interest  at  6  per  cent,  $1,320;  depreciation,  $1,100;  taxes  and 
insurance.  $200  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $600,  making  $5,920,  less  in- 
come, $2,000,  and  we  have  $3,920,  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,000 
hours,  costing  .035  per  hour,  and  furnishing  342  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

ELGIN.  111.,  plant,  $27,000;  coal,  $2.00  per  ton;  operating  ex- 
penses, $13,000;  interest  at  5  per  cent,  $1,350;  depreciation,  $1,350; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $270,  making  $15,970,  cost  of  street  lights  ".burned 
2,500  hours,  costing  0316  per  hour,  and  furnishing  632  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent.  The  salary  of  the  electrician'  is  charged  to  general 
expenses  and  not  to  the  lighting  account.  After  using  plant  six  years, 
they  had  to  expend  $10,000  to  put  it  in  shape  to  do  their  business. 

EASTON,  Pa.,  plant,  $45,000  ;  operating  expenses,  $12,000  ;  interest 
at  four  per  cent,  $1,800;  depreciation,  $2,250;  taxes  and  insurance, 
$450  ;  making  $16,500,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  3,800  hours,  costing 
.0307  per  hour,  and  furnishing  651  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

The  mayor  says : 

"  In  Easton  the  cost  is  claimed  not  to  be  over  $87  per  lamp,  but  both 
the  city  treasurer  and  controller  claim  that  the  cost  is  far  in  excess  of 
those  figures." 

The  Express  says : 

"  The  same  number  of  lights  as  now  used  can  be  had  of  a  private 
company  for  $8,000,  or  a  saving  to  the  city  of  $4,000  a  year.  The  fact  is 
the  cost  is  excessive,  and  the  service  abominable." 

84: 


This  became  so  oppressive  that  a  resolution  was  introduced  iuto  the 
council  calling  for  bids  from  private  companies,  and,  of  course,  if 
accepted,  it  would  shut  down  the  municipal  plant. 

ESTHER VILLE,  Iowa,  plant,  $;8,000  ;  coal,  82.50  per  ton  ;  oper- 
ating expenses,  $2,500;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $480;  depreciation, 
$400;  taxes  and  insurance,  |S0  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $400  ;  making 
$3,800,  less  income  of  •*2,800,  and  we  have  Sl.OdO,  as  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .0271  per  hour,  and  furnishing  442  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

EMMONS,  Pa.,  plant,  $2,600  ;  lights  burned  2,190  hours,  costing 
.0511  per  hour,  and  furnishing  391  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

FREMONT,  Neb.,  plant,  $25,000;  coal,  $3.35  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $7,000;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $1,500:  depreciation,  $1,250  ; 
taies  and  insurance,  $250 ;  making  $9,900,  less  income,  $5,000,  and  we 
have  $4,900,  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0278  per 
hour,  and  furnishing  431  caudle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

FAYETTE,  Mo.,  plant,  $12,000;  coal,  $2  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $3,500;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $480:  depreciation,  $G00 : 
taxes  and  insurance,  $120  ;  sinking  fund,  $600  ;  making  $5,300,  as  cost  of 
street  lights  burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .086  per  hour,  and  furnishing 
232  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

FAIRFIELD,  Iowa,  plant,  $7,000;  coal,  $2.25  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $1,279.71  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent.  $350  ;  depreciation,  $350  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $70;  making  $2, 049. 71,  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
1,954  hours,  costing  .052  per  hour,  furnishing  384  candle  power  per  hour 
for  one  cent. 

FULTON,  Mo.,  plant,  $16,000;  coal,  $1.75  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $4,000 :  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $830  ;  depreciation,  $830  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $100  ;  sinking  fund  to  paj'  bonds,  $1,200  ;  making 
$7,020,  less  income,  $5,000,  and  we  have  $2,020,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  3.000  hours,  costing  .039  per  hour,  and  furnishing  512  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

FORT  WORTH,  Texas,  plant,  $44,000;  coal,  $3.10  per  ton;  oper- 
ating expenses,  $5,624.15;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $3,040;  depreciation, 
$2,200  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  $440;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $2,200; 
making  $13,104.15,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0364 
per  hour,  and  furnishing  329  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

FREDONIA,  N.  Y.,  plant,  $16,000:  coal,  $2.00  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $2,750  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $800  ;  depreciation,  $800  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $150  ;  making  $4,500,  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
1,500  hours,  costing  .0384  per  hour,  and  furnishing  520  caudle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

So 


FREDERICK,  Md.,  plant,  $17,000;  coal,  $2.50  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $6,000";  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $680  ;  depreciation,  $850  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $170  ;  making  $7,700,  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
2,200  hours,  costing  .0443  per  hour,  and  furnishing  451*  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

GRANVILLE,  Ohio,  plant,  $6,000  ;  coal,  $1.25  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $1,400;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $360;  depreciation,  $300; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $50  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $300 ;  making  $2,410, 
cost  of  street  lights  burned  1,320  hours,  costing  .0454  per  hour,  and 
furnishing  440  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

GRAFTON.  W.  Va,  The  following  report  was  made  to  the  mayor 
and  common  council,  and  purporting  to  show  the  entire  cost  to  the  tax 
payers  of  operating  94  2,000-candle  power  arc  lights  every  night  and  all 
night. 

To  the  Honorable  Mayor  and  Council  of  the  Citu  of  Grafton: 

Gentlemen  :— I  beg  to  submit  this  report  of  the  city  electric  light 
plant  from  May  1,  1899,  to  December  31,  1899— eight  months. 

Repairs  on  engine,  $4.75  ;  repairs  on  dynamo,  $1,10  ;  oil,  water,  and 
packing,  -^62.20;  carbons,  $330.68;  fuel,  $182.00;  tools,  $15.83;  new 
lamps,  $32.00;  labor,  $54.64;  material  for  lamps,  $79.64;  lamp  trimmer, 
$350.00  ;  miscellaneous  hauling,  $13.24;  total  for  operating  eight  months, 
$1,129.45. 

A  local  paper  there,  which  advocates  municipal  ownership,  publishes 
this  report,  and  comments  as  follows: 

"The  report  is  an  interesting  document.  It  gives  the  public  a 
detailed  statement,  showing  the  exact  cost  for  the  past  eight  months  to 
be  the  insignificant  sum  of  $1,129.45. 

*'  We  feel  proud  of  the  showing  thus  made,  and  believe  the  cost  per 
light  for  Grafton  is  less  than  in  any  other  city  in  the  United  States. 

"Be  it  remembered  right  here  that  the  item  charged  under  head  of 
labor,  $54.64,  was  paid  for  repairs  to  line." 

We  give  this  report  as  a  sample  of  many  sent  out  purporting  to  show 
cost  of  lights. 

The  items  show  that  they  used  an  engine  and  dynamo;  that  they 
used  $62.20  of  oil,  etc.  ;  but  not  a  cent  is  charged  for  a  man  to  run  this 
engine  and  dynamo  all  night  every  night  in  the  year.  Therefore,  we 
must  infer  that  it  ran  itself,  stopping  and  starting  automatically  ;  that 
the  oil  used  walked  into  the  cups  without  assistance ;  that  the  $182  worth 
of  fuel  did  not  require  any  help  in  placing  it  in  the  furnaces  ;  that  the 
superintendent  made  no  charges  for  his  services  ;  that  the  five  per  cent 
interest  upon  the  $10,000  which  plant  cost  paid  itself,  notwithstanding 
they  had  agreed  to  pay  it  ;  that  there  was  no  depreciation,  no  taxes  or 
insurance.  Every  one  knows  that  nearly  all  the  charges  and 
expenses  of  the  electric  plant  were  charged  to  some  other  department, 
but  the  public  are  told  that  the  above  account  covers  all  the  costs  of 
producing  the  lights,  and  then  compare  the  cost  of  lights  made  in  this 

86 


way  with  prices  of  private  companies.  Does  it  benefit  the  tax  payers, 
and  why,  if  jiaities  wish  to  give  the  facts,  are  not  all  the  expenses  and 
charsjes  made  pul)lic  and  placed  where  they  belong  ? 

GRAND  LEDGE,  Mich.,  plant,  810,000  ;  burned  1,400  hours,  cost- 
ing .11  cents  per  hour,  and  furnishing  181  candle  power  per  hour  for  one 
cent. 

In  this  calculation  plant  is  credited  with  all  income  received. 

GREENWICH,  Ohio,  plant.  $10,000;  coal,  !|1.35  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  .'51,7il2.(J0  ;  interest  at  live  per  cent,  8500;  depreciation,  8500; 
taxes  and  insurance,  8100;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  8500;  making 
83,302.00,  less  income,  81.200,  and  we  have  82,192.60,  as  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .0GG4  per  hour,  and  furnishing  301 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

GALVESTON,  Texas.,  plant,  865,000;  coal,  ^5  p^r  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  825,000;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  83,250  ;  depreciation,  83,250  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  8050;  making  832,800,  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
3,000  hours,  costing  .034  per  hour,  and  furnishing  588  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

GREENFIELD,  lud..  plant,  $30,000  ;  natural  gas  ;  operating  ex- 
penses, 84,000;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $1,800  ;  depreciation,  $1,500  ; 
taxes,  8150;  .sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $1,500  ;  making  88,950.  cost  of 
street  lights  burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .05  per  hour,  and  furnishing  400 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

GRIFFIN,  Ga..  plant,  $30,000;  operating  expenses,  $5,500  ;  interest 
at  five  per  cent,  81,500  ;  depreciation,  81.500  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  $300; 
sinking  fund  to  pa^'  bonds,  81.500  ;  making  810,300,  less  income,  86,300, 
and  we  have  !f4,000,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,200  hours,  costing  .0343 
per  hour,  and  furnishing  583  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

GOSHEN,  Ind.,  plant,  $24,000;  coal,  82.95  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  •'f4,500  ;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $1,440;  depreciation,  $1,200; 
taxes  and  insurance,  .$240  ;  making  $7,380,  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
2,400  hours,  costing  .0240  per  hour,  and  furnishing  813  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

HOLYOKE,  Mass.  In  December,  1896,  the  city  council  voted  to 
establish  a  municipal  plant,  and  on  January  1,  1897,  voted  the  second 
time,  as  required  by  law. 

The  Holyoke  Water  Power  company  tiled  with  the  citj'  clerk  a 
schedule  of  its  gas  plant  and  its  electric  plant,  and  offered  to  sell  to  the 
city  the  whole  of  both  plants  for  .$1,000,000.  The  company  also  offered 
to  sell  by  lease  in  f uch  form  as  is  ordinarily  used  for  such  conveyance 
by  it  in  Holyoke,  one-half  of  one  mill  power  of  water  to  be  used  in  con- 
nection with  the  gas  plant,  also  sixteen  now  permanent  twenty-four-hour 

67 


mill  powers  of  water  to  be  drawn  from  the  first  level  canal,  and  used  in 
connection  with  the  electric  plant.  The  sum  paid  for  rent  of  said  mill 
powers  to  be  $1,500  a  year  for  each  and  everj'  one  of  said  sixteen  and 
one-half  mill  powers,  payable  in  semi-annual  payments. 

On  January  13  a  special  committee,  consisting  of  the  mayor  and 
three  members  of  the  city  council,  was  constituted,  with  the  duty  to 
examine  the  gas  and  electric  Kght  plants  and  ascertain  the  present  value 
of  the  same,  also  to  confer  with  the  officers  of  said  company  and  deter- 
mine, if  possible,  a  price  for  such  plants  as  will  be  mutually  satisfactory. 

The  special  committee  procured  experts,  who,  with  the  permission 
of  the  company,  were  to  examine  and  value  the  gas  and  electric  plants. 
They  could  not  agree,  and  the  proposition  was  rejected. 

The  Water  Power  company,  on  March  5,  made  application  to  the 
supreme  judicial  court  to  compel  the  city  to  take  both  its  gas  and  electric 
plants,  and  to  pay  for  same  in  accordance  with  the  offer  of  the  company 
as  given  above,  and  in  compliance  with  the  law. 

Another  committee  was  appointed  by  the  council  to  make  further 
examination. 

This  committee  reported  in  June  that  they  had  hired  two  gas  and 
two  electric  non-resident  experts,  at  a  fixed  price  per  day,  to  examine  the 
plants  and  testify  concerning  them  before  the  commission  appointed 
by  the  court  ;  they  had  also  engaged  a  number  of  architects,  civil 
engineers  and  contractors  to  make  plans  and  estimates  of  the  two  plants ; 
that  the  work  of  these  parties  had  been  completed,  and  was  in  the  hands 
of  the  city's  legal  counsel ;  that  the  expenses  of  the  committee  had 
been  $8,291.67. 

The  above  action  was  taken  in  1898. 

In  April,  1899,  the  aldermen  received  the  following  communication  : 

To  the  Board  of  Aldermen  : 

Gentlemen  : — At  a  meeting  of  the  Manufacturers'  Association  the 
following  vote  was  passed  unanimously  : 

That,  in  the  present  financial  situation,  it  would  be  disadvantageous 
to  the  city  of  Holyoke  to  acquire  the  gas  and  electric  plants  of  the 
Holyoke  Water  Power  Company,  and  the  Manufacturers'  Association 
recommends  that  the  board  of  aldermen  postpone  the  taking  of  those 
plants,  for  a  period  of  five  years  at  least,  and  that  it  will  make  a  contract 
with  the  Holj''oke  Water  Power  Company  on  the  best  possible  terms. 

At  the  May  meeting  of  the  aldermen  it  was  ordered,  That  the  com- 
mittee on  municipal  lighting  be  and  they  are  hereby  ordered  and 
instructed  to  confer  with  the  city  solicitor  and,  acting  on  his  advice,  to 
make  some  arrangement,  if  possible,  with  the  Holyoke  Water  Power 
Company  to  defer  the  taking  of  the  gas  and  electric  lighting  plants  of 
said  company  for  a  period  of  five  years,  provided  the  rights  of  the  city 
are  fully  protected. 

Ordered  further,  That  the  said  committee  be  and  they  are  hereby 
empowered,  in  case  said  matter  is  deferred,  to  make  a  contract  with  the 

8S 


Holyoke  Water  Power  Company  for  furuishiriEf  j^as  and  electric  lights 
and  power  to  the  citj'  of  Holyoke  for  a  term  of  five  years. 

The  committee  reported  and  recommended  that  the  following 
proposition  be  sent  to  said  company,  to  be  entered  into  by  the  said  coni- 
pauj'  and  the  city  of  Holyoke,  subject  to  consent  given  or  satisfaction 
thereof  by  the  legislature  of  the  state. 

That  a  fifteen  year  contract  be  made  for  public  lighting  at  the 
following  rates  :  21~>  to  800  lights,  1,200  candle  power,  each  *8o  ;  800  to 
400  lights,  1,200  candle  power,  each  s88.8oJ  ;  over  400.1ights,  1,200  candle 
l)ower,  each  $75.  After  the  expiration  of  each  successive  five  j-ears  from 
the  date  of  the  contract,  the  city  mav  demand  and  have  a  submission  to 
arl)itration  for  reducing  the  price  below  that  fixed  in  the  contract,  in 
case  the  cost  of  manufacture  or  distribution  should  be  reduced  by  new 
discoveries,  or  inventions,  or  progress  in  the  art  in  successful  commercial 
operation. 

It  was  voted  that  the  Committee  on  Municipal  Lighting  be  and 
they  are  hereby  authorized  and  instructed  to  oflfer  the  terms 
proposed  in  their  report  to  the  Holyoke  Water  Power  Company,  and  in 
case  said  terms  are  accepted,  the  board  of  public  works  and  mayor  are 
hereby  authorized  to  enter  into  a  contract  with  the  said  companj'  on  the 
said  terms,  and  to  petition  the  legislature  of  the  state  for  permission  to 
make  said  contract  binding,  and  for  a  discontinuance  of  said  suit. 

Here  we  have  the  experience  of  a  citj'  who  spent  thoiisands  of  dol- 
lars over  municipal  ownership,  by  investigations  and  committees,  and 
after  the  private  company  had  placed  their  plants  at  the  disposal  of  the 
city,  thej'  wanted  to  withdraw  from  the  plan  which  their  action  under 
the  state  law  compelled  them  to  carry  out,  but  when  the  city  oflicers 
learned  the  facts  regarding  these  plants  they  were  willing  to  make  a 
fifteen-year  contract  at  $85  per  lamp,  with  water  power.  This  proposi- 
tion on  the  part  of  the  city  was  made  to  the  private  company  after  they 
bad  employed  four  experts,  besides  architects  and  contractors  to  give 
them  the  facts  regarding  cost  of  electric  lighting. 

HENDERSON,  Minn.,  plant,  $0,000  ;  coal,  $4.00  per  ton  :  operat- 
ing expenses,  SI, 700  ;  interest  at  6  per  cent,  $3G0  ;  depreciation,  $800  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $G0  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $300,  making 
$2,660,  less  income,  $2,000.  and  we  have  $600,  cost  of  street  lights,  being 
.0883  per  hour,  and  furnishing  240  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

HINGHAM,  Mass.,  plant,  $24,413;  operating  expenses,  $10,194.65; 
interest  at  4  per  cent,  $976.52  ;  depreciation,  $1,220.65  ;  taxes,  $384,  mak- 
ing $12,775.82.  less  income,  $5,302.33,  and  we  have  $7,473.49,  cost  of 
street  lights  burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .0479  per  hour,  and  furnishing  250 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

HANNIBAL,  Mo.,  plant,  $62,000  ;  coal,  $1.55  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $15,540;  interest  at  5  per  cent,  $3,000;  depreciation,  $3,100; 
taxes  and  insurance,   $620  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  ^bonds,    $2,400  ;  making 

SO 


$24,660,  less  income  from  incandescents  and  power,  $13,202,  and  we  have 
$11,458,  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,500  honrs, costing  .0458  per  hour, 
and  furnishing  436  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

HUDSON,  Mass.,  plant,  $45,273  ;  cost  of  a  2,500  candle-power  lamp, 
as  made  by  the  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Commissioners,  was  $132.08. 
burned  1,053  hours,  costing  .0799  per  hour,  and  furnishing  250  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

HULL,  Mass.,  plant,  $119,367;  use  25  candle  power  incandescent 
for  streets,  costing,  as  stated  by  the  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Commis- 
sioners, $60.18  per  year,  burned  1,387  hours,  costing  .043  per  hour'for 
incandescent  lights. 

HUBBARD,  Ohio,  plant,  $6,000;  coal,  $1.65  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $2,200  ;  interest  at  5  per  cent,  $300  ;  depreciation,  $300  ;  taxes 
and  insurance,  $60;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $300,  making  $3,160, 
less  income,  $2,200,  and  we  have  $960.  cost  of  street  lights  burned  1,260 
hours,  costing  .038  per  hour,  and  furnishing  526  candle  power  per  hour 
for  one  cent. 

HAMILTON,  Ohio,  had  a  mayor  who  was  an  advocate  of  municipal 
ownership,  and,  in  his  report,  he  said,  "He  had  made  an  investigation, 
and,  in  some  cases,  the  figures  show  that  the  city  could  get  its  lights  for 
nothing,  making  enough  out  of  the  profits  on  general  electric  lighting 
business  to  provide  all  the  arc  lights  required  free  of  expense."  This 
mayor's  statement  is  the  visionary  and  theoretical  part  of  the  plan. 
What  does  the  practical  part  or  real  experience  show  alter  the  plant  has 
been  established? 

The  city  owns  water  works  started  in  1884  and  cost  $315,000.  In 
1889  they  started  a  gas  plant  costing  $160,000,  and  an  electric  light  plant 
costing  $100,000  was  started  in  1895.  This  amount  of  |575,000  was  raised 
by  selling  city  bonds.     The  city  clerk  says  : 

' '  The  threat  to  shut  down  the  electric  light  plant  is  because  they  are 
out  of  funds.  Hamilton,  of  all  the  cities  in  the  United  States,  has  been 
most  afflicted  with  the  municipal  ownership  craze,  and  now,  having  its 
fill  on  theory,  is  reaping  the  results,  and  we  must  bear  and  grin  as  best 
we  can  under  adverse  circumstances. 

"  But,  on  the  condition  that  now  confronts  us,  we  ought  to  try  and 
inject  a  little  common  sense  into  the  municipal  cranium,  and  try  and 
evolve  some  scheme  whereby  we  can  kite  along  for  the  present,  and 
perhaps  realize  some  of  the  fond  expectations  that  were  held  out  in  the 
past. 

"We  are  deluded  in  the  belief  that  we  have  cheap  water,  gas  and 
electric  light.  When  we  add  to  these  luxuries  the  fact  that  we  have 
so  raised  the  rate  of  municipal  taxation  until  it  has  become  burdensome, 
and  then  compare  with  other  cities  of  our  size,  we  find  that  we  are  not  as 
well  oflf  as  we  think  we  are. 

90 


"  We  are  taxed  to  pay  the  interest  on  the  water  works  bonds,  as  well 
as  to  provide  for  their  redemption.  We  are  taxed  to  \my  the  interest  of 
the  gns  works  and  the  electric  li^'ht  plant,  as  well  us  to  provide  for  the 
redemption  of  bonds,  and  we  are  also  taxed  for  the  {jurpose  (»f  li^'litiu^ 
the  cort)oration,  which  is  nothing  more  than  ilouble  taxation.  This  is  a 
curions  situation,  but  is  nevertheless  true. 

"  While  the  water  tax  levy  is  up  to  the  limit,  it  fails  to  pay  the 
interest  and  bonds  falling  due,  and  the  same  may  be  said  of  the  gas  and 
electric  light  levy,  and  thej'  also  barely  pay  the  interest  charges,  with  no 
bonds  yet  falling  due.  When  they  do  commence  to  fall  due,  how  they 
are  going  to  be  paid  is  a  serious  question. 

"  We  should  realize  that  the  annual  interest  charge  for  water,  gas 
works  and  electric  light  is  .*28.0U0,  with  slO.OOO  water  works  bonds  falling 
due  each  year,  making  a  total  charge  of  $88,000,  which  must  be  paid 
annually,  and  no  assistance  is  rendered  by  either  of  said  plants  in  helinng 
to  pay  said  charges  :  it  looks  like  the  city  is  carrying  a  heavy  burden. 
*  *  *  *  The  city  has  reached  the  condition  that  comes  to  every 
individual  who  reaches  out  beyond  his  means. 

'■  Maturity  comes  and  protest  has  been  avoided  during  the  past  year 
by  using  heroic  remedies,  liefuuding  bonds  as  they  fall  due  may  be,  in 
the  opinion  of  many,  good  financiering,  but  that  does  not  pay  the  debt 
or  discharge  the  interest,  which  creeps  along  just  the  same  as  the  bonds 
fall  due.  and  which  must  be  paid. 

'■  Hamilton  is  being  devoured  whole  by  its  interest  charges.  During 
the  coming  year  the  interest  owing  by  the  citj'  will  amount  to  the  sum 
of  843,085  ;  bonds  falling  due  $48,000,  or  a  total  of  $i)l,12r),  or  nearly  90 
per  cent  of  the  entire  revenue  of  the  city  will  be  necessary  for  meeting 
these  charges.  We  have  had  theory  long  enough,  and  we  must  meet  the 
.condition." 

A  correspondent  writing  from  Hamilton  says  : 

"  The  question  of  closing  down  the  electric  light  plant  is  provo"king 
much  talk.  To  be  practically  thrown  into  utter  darkness  again  all  on 
account  of  mismanagement  is  not  relished  by  those  who  pay  the  high  tax 
rate  to  keep  things  moving  along.  The  issuing  of  S15.U00  worth  of  bonds 
to  operate  the  plant  is  more  than  the  people  can  stand,  especially  when  the 
light  plant  has  already  cost  ^oO.OOO  more  than  it  should  have  cost  the 
tax  payers."  Still  the  trustees  announced  that  they  would  be  compelled 
to  shut  down  for  want  ot  funds. 

The  mayor  gave  the  theoretical  i)art  of  the  plan.  Here  we  have  the 
actual  or  real  experience  after  the  plant  has  been  established.  Still  later 
developments  also  show  how  such  things  end. 

The  city  not  being  able  to  meet  its  obligations.  Judge  Crane,  an 
attorney,  filed  a  petition  for  a  receiver  for  the  city  of  Hamilton,  with  the 
following  i)leadiug.  and  alleging  ten  grounds  in  support  of  the  api>lica- 
cation.  viz.  : 

That  the  city  is  on  the  verge  of  bankruptcy. 

That  the  city  has  refused  to  paj'  just  debts  which  are  a  year  overdue. 

That  the  city  has  defaulted  upon  various  bonded  debts. 

til 


That  the  credit  of  the  city  grows  worse  each  raonth. 

That,  through  the  extravagance  of  those  in  authority,  more  money 
is  expended  than  the  resources  of  the  city  will  permit. 

That  the  city  is  more  severely  taxed  than  any  other  in  Ohio. 

That  large  amounts  of  the  city  funds  are  misappropriated  by  those  in 
authority. 

That  the  city  authorities  do  not  take  care  of  the  city's  finances 
according  to  law. 

That  the  several  funds  are  now  depleted ;  that  the  schools  cannot  be 
kept  open  more  than  a  month  ;  that  the  street  fuiids  are  exhausted  ;  that 
there  is  no  money  to  keep  the  library  open  for  more  than  two  months  ; 
that  the  city  is  unable  to  light  its  parks  or  public  places,  or  to  remove 
garbage,  or  clean  the  streets,  and  is  otherwise  is  great  danger  of  bank- 
ruptcy. 

The  city  clerk  claims  they  can  pay  all  lawful  obligations,  and  says: 

"  If  these  plants  can  be  so  managed  as  to  pay  the  interest  charge 
alone  from  out  of  their  earnings,  we  could  cut  the  levy  $3.50  on  each 
$1,000. 

"  Of  the  $14.20  of  taxes  collected  on  each  $1,000  for  city  purposes, 
$8.10  goes  to  pay  interest  and  bonds,  leaving  but  $6.10  for  the  other 
needs  of  the  cit3^  The  city  has  never  yet  defaulted  in  the  payment  of 
any  interest  or  the  payment  of  its  bonds. 

''  But  the  next  ten  years  are  going  to  be  hard  ones  on  the  tax  payers, 
by  reason  of  direct  assessments,  but  the  city  has  assets  for  every 
liability." 

This  means  that  tax  payers  have  got  to  consent  to  assessments  to 
meet  the  citj^'s  liabilities  or  lose  their  property,  for  every  man's  property 
in  the  city  is  mortgaged  for  these  city  debts. 

E.  B.  Kogers,  being  interviewed,  said  : 

"  I  think  it  was  right.  There  is  not  a  department  in  the  city  that  is 
not  in  the  rut.  I  think  that  one  or  three  men,  under  instruction  of  the 
court,  should  be  appointed  to  take  charge  of  affairs.  Everything  costs 
us  double,  it  seems." 

Judge  Crane  said  the  bill  had  been  marked  O.  K.  by  the  committee 
on  claims,  and  that  the  city  had  refused  to  pay  it.  Whether  or  not  we 
get  a  receiver,  he  said,  we  wish  to  call  a  halt  to  the  bonded  indebtedness 
and  the  reckless  expenditures,  which  are  continually  increasing. 

The  bonds  of  the  city  of  Hamilton,  in  total,  are  $877,453,  and  only 
about  18,000  population.  Here  we  have  the  direct  results  of  a  munic- 
ipality going  into  a  business  enterprise.  If  the  city  had  not  adopted  the 
plan  of  municipal  ownership  it  would  not  stand  in  the  position  it  does 
to-day. 

The  Hamilton,  Ohio,  News  says  : 

"  By  the  way  in  which  the  coimcil  seems  determined  to  award  the 
contracts  for  the  new  city  electric  light  plant,  the  cost  of  the  plant  will  run 
up  to  about  $101,000.  The  people  were  assured  originally  that  the  plant 
•would  only  cost  $50,000,  and  a  great  array  of  figures  was  presented  to 
prove  this  fact." 

92 


HENDERSON.  Ky.,  plaut.  833,000;  coal,  7:5  cents  per  ton;  oper- 
ating expenses,  >:().(;il0.1>3  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  ^IjG-'iO:  depreciation, 
$1,650;  taxes  nucl  insurance,  S300  :  niakincr  *10,2".tO,  cost  of  street  lijibts 
burned  2.000  hours,  costing  .0311  per  Lour,  and  furnishing  G43  caudle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

HAMILTON.  N.  Y..  phint,  830,000;  coal.  *3. 10  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  84,000  ;  interest  at  four  percent,  $1,200;  depreciation,  Sl.SOO; 
taxes  and  insurance,  yloO  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  8500  ;  making 
87,350,  less  income,  82,500,  and  we  have  84,850,  as  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  2,200  hours,  costing  .044  per  hour,  and  furnishing  272  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

HIGGINSVILLE,  Mo.,  plant,  810.000  ;  coal,  81.80  per  ton  ;  oper- 
ating expenses.  84,800  ;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  8060 ;  depreciation.  8800; 
taxes  and  insurance,  8160;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  8650  ;  making  $7,370, 
less  income,  §4,500.  and  we  have  $2,870.  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
1,500  hours,  costing  .0444  per  hour,  and  furnishing  270  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

HERINGTON,  Kan.,  plant.  $28,000;  burned  1,825  hours,  costing 
.14  per  hour,  and  furnishing  130  caudle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

HOLLAND,  Mich.,  plant,  $4,000;  operating  expenses,  80,500; 
interest  at  four  per  cent,  81.600  ;  depreciation,  82,000  ;  taxes  and  insur- 
ance, 8400  ;  making  813,500,  less  income,  $8,500,  and  we  have  $5,000.  cost 
of  street  lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0416  per  hour,  and  furnishing 
480  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

HERKIMER.  N.  Y..  plant.  $18,600  ;  coal.  $2.50  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  83.433.15  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $744  ;  depreciation,  8!»30  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  8105;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  8700:  making  85.912, 
cost  of  street  lights  burned  3.204  hours,  costing  .0256  per  hour,  and 
furnishing  781  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

HIGH  POINT.  N.  C,  plant,  813,000  ;  coal,  $4.10  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  82,200 ;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  8780  ;  depreciation,  8650 ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $130  ;  making  $3,760,  less  income,  $1,500.  and' we 
have  $2,260,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .0302  per 
hour,  and  furnishing  307  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

HUNTINGTON.  Ind.,  plant,  $15,000;  lights  burned  2.100  hours, 
costing  .0401  per  hour,  and  furnishing  408  candle  power  per  hour  for  oue 
cent. 

INDIANOLA,  Iowa,  plant,  $25,362.45;  coal,  81.20  per  ton  ;  oper- 
ating expenses,  85,100  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  81.268. 12  ;  depreciation, 
$1,268.12;  taxes  and  water  rent,  8253.62;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds, 
$1,000;  making  $8,889.86,  less  income.  $3,873.34,  and  we  have  85,016,53, 

93 


cost  of  135  16-candle  power  incandescent  street  lights,  being  $37.15  per 
lamp  per  year,  burned  on  moonlight  schedule,  until  midnight. 

JACKSONVILLE,  Fla.,  plant,  $150,000;  operating  expenses, 
$38,039.10;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $7,500;  depreciation,  $7,500;  taxes 
and  insurance,  $1,500;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $(),000;  making 
$60,539,  less  income,  $45,569,  and  we  have  $14,970,  as  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  4,000  hours,  costing  .0233  per  hour,  and  furnishing  858  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

An  action  was  brought  against  the  city  for  damages  caused  to  an 
individual,  and  the  United  States  court  awarded  $1,500  to  the  plaintiff. 

JOHNSON,  Vt.,  plant,  $7,000;  water  power,  operating  expenses, 
$600  ;  interest  at  4  per  cent,  $280  ;  depreciation,  $350  ;  taxes  and  insur- 
ance, $70  ;  sinking  fund  for  payment  of  bonds,  $300.  making  $1,600,  less 
income,  $1,100,  and  we  have  $500,  cost  of  incandescent  street  lights 
burned  1,400  hours. 

JACKSON,  Ohio,  plant,  $20,000  ;  operating  expenses,  $6,000  ;  in- 
terest at  4  per  cent,  $800;  depreciation,  $1,000;  taxes  and  insurance, 
$200;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $1,000,  making  $9,000,  less  income, 
$4,500,  and  we  have  $4,500,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,000  hours,  cost- 
ing .0375  per  hour,  and  furnishing  533  candle  power  per  hour  for  one 
cent. 

One  citizen  stated  that  he  had  128  incandescent  lights,  and  that  they 
only  cost  him  $6.22  a  month,  being  .0487  per  lamp  per  month.  Another 
claimed  that  the  cost  to  him  of  18  incandescents  was  five  cents  per 
month,  the  other  tax  payers  being  assessed  to  makeup  the  loss  caused 
bj'  such  business. 

JACKSONVILLE,  111.,  plant,  $19,650;  coal,  $1.74  per  ton;  oper- 
ating expenses,  $7,000  ;  interest  at  5  per  cent,  $982  ;  depreciation.  $982  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $196,  making  $9,160,  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
2,000  hours,  costing  .027  per  hour,  and  furnishing  740  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

JAMESTOWN,  N.  Y.,  plant,  $80,000;  coal,  $1.45  per  ton  ;  oper- 
ating  expenses,  $20,228.09  interest  at  4  per  cent,  $3,200  ;  depreciation, 
$4,000  ;  taxes,  $1,794.40  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $6,200,  making 
$35,422.49,  less  income,  $8,264.39,  and  we  have  $27,158.10  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  4,000  hours,  costing  .0229  per  hour,  and  furnishing  524 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

The  mayor  said  to  a  committee  from  Middletown,  N.  Y.,  that  they 
"are  engaged  in  commercial  lighting  to  some  extent,  enough  so  that  the 
city  controls  the  price  charged  for  lighting  both  by  electric  and  gas 
plants.  This  branch  of  the  lighting  department  is  not  only  profitable 
to  the  municipality,  but  it  is  a  great  source  of  satisfaction  to  the  con- 
sumer." The  following  action,  taken  by  the  citizens  of  Jamestown,  does 
not  appear  to  confirm  the  mayor's  statement : 

94 


The  council  appointed  a  committee  to  investigate  the  municipal  elec- 
tric plant,  and  to  decide  upon  the  question  of  selling  the  commercial 
parts  of  the  plant.  At  the  council  meeting  this  committee  reported  and 
recommended  the  sale  of  this  department  of  the  plant.  The  report  was 
as  follows  : 

"Appropriated  in  18D5  $14,589,  transferred  $2,01)0  ;  in  1896  appro- 
priated *12.000,  transferred  ^3,000  ;  1897,  appropriated  $15,123,  trans- 
ferred 84.000  ;  IS'.lS,  appropriated  816.000;  in  1899,  $6,700.  Interests 
years,  on  outstanding  bonds,  .*1'3,400,  making  89'),812. 

Five  j'ears  street  lighting,  from  statements  published,  average,  813,000 
— total,  865,000  ;  and  we  have  830,812,  cost  of  commercial  plant. 

Commercial  machinery  on  hand,  per  inventory,  812,450.  showing  an 
approximate  loss  of  $18,362.  Of  this  there  is  yet  87,000  on  hand  to  run 
until  April  Ist,  1900.  If  this  $7,000  will  see  them  through,  they  have 
al)out  ^IS.OOO  in  live  years  that  is  unaccounted  for,  and  nothing  for  depre- 
ciation since  the  i)lant  was  V)uilt." 

The  maj'or  opp(Jsed  the  action  of  the  committee  and  made  some  very 
strong  charges,  which  called  for  an  answer  from  the  committee  as  fol- 
lows : 

"  I  supposed  it  was  facts  and  figures  that  it  was  the  duty  of  the  com- 
mittee to  furnish,  as  nearly  as  they  could  from  sources  available,  of  the 
success  or  failure  of  the  commercial  portion  of  our  city's  electric  light 
plant.     This  was  done  conscieutiouslj^  and  we  reported  accordingly." 

The  mayor  saj'S  :  "  I  don't  know  where  they  obtained  their  ligures." 
The  chairman  of  committee  answers  as  follows  :  "  For  his  information 
as  well  as  for  all  interested,  they  were  taken  from  the  official  reports  of 
the  common  council  and  from  the  annual  reports  of  the  treasurer.  ♦  * 
I  ask  any  and  all  to  examine  the  official  records,  and  see  who,  if  any  one, 
is  falsifying  figures.  Expense  account,  in  my  judgment,  should  l)e 
charged  with  much  that  is  now  charged  to  the  plant.  I  am  aware  that 
the  larger  the  expense  account  is  the  more  will  be  the  monthlj'  average 
of  our  arc  lights,  but  in  justice  to  tax  payers  I  sa3'  nothing  should  be 
charged  to  either  plant  as  permanent  that  the  manager  cannot  at  any 
time  show  you  and  produce  a  voucher  Viill  for  same,  if  required.  If  any 
part  or  portion  is  worn  out,  destroyed  or  lost,  all  such  should  be  made 
good  from  expense  account.  In  looking  over  the  invoice  of  the  com- 
mercial plant,  it  seems  to  me  that  I  see  several  amounts,  amounting  to  a 
goodly  sum  that  should  be  in  expense  account. 

S.  W.  THOMPSON,  Chairman. 

A  tax  paj'er  of  Jamestown,  in  the  local  paper,  says  : 
"  The  mayor,  in  all  the  time  he  spent  looking  up  municipal  lighting, 
did  not  obtain  any  information  as  to  prices  in  the  citv  of  Jamestown. 
He  did  not  tell  that  he  knew  of  one  concern  that  paid  the  city  two  cents 
per  1,000  Watts,  and  another  ten  cents  j)er  1,000  Watts.  Now,  it  is  a  fact 
that  incandescent  lights  are  furnished  for  ten  cents  each.  It  is  also  a 
fact  that  ten  incandescent  lights  cost  as  much  to  run  as  one  supposed 
1.200  arc.     Ten  incandescent  lights  at  ten  cents  would  be  81.     Now,  who 

95 


would  ever  think  of  furnishing?  an  arc  ligjht  for  $1  ?  He  did  not  tell  the 
Journal  that  there  were  63  lights  furnished  free  of  charge.  He  gives 
the  prices  in  other  cities.  Why  did  he  not  give  Jamestown's  prices? 
Oh,  nol  the  tax  paj'ers  would  be  surprised. 

"The  special  committee  is  composed  of  good  men,  and,  no  doubt, 
they  have  looked  into  all  matters  pertaining  to  commercial  lighting,  and 
I  think  I  can  safely  say  that  it  is  the  wish  of  all  Jamestowners  who  pay 
.taxes  that  the  council  sustain  this  special  committee.  Municipal  owner- 
ship in  Jamestown  is  a  failure,  and  there  doesn't  seem  to  be  any  one  who 
knows  who  to  put  the  blame  on." 

KALAMAZOO,  Mich.,  plant,  .$43,000;  coal,  $2.45  per  ton  ;  oper- 
ating expenses,  $13,000  ;  interest  at  live  per  cent,  $2,150  ;  depreciation, 
$2,150;  taxes  and  insurance,  $430;  making  $17,730,  cost  of  streetlights 
burned  8,000  hours,  costing  .0295  per  hour,  and  furnishing  677  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

KENDALLVILLE,  Ind.,  plant,  $8,000  ;  coal,  f  2.25  per  toQ  ;  oper- 
ating expenses,  $28,000  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $400  ;  depreciation, 
$400  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  $50  ;  making  $3,650,  less  income,  $1,000,  and 
we  have  $2,650,  as  cost  of  street  lights,  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .022 
per  hour,  and  furnishing  909  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

LOWELL,  Mich.,  plant,  $23,000  ;  water  power :  operating  expenses, 
$4,077.70;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $1,150;  depreciation,  $1,150;  taxes 
and  insurance,  $230  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $1,150  ;  making  $7,757.70, 
less  income,  $3,613,  and  we  have  84,144.70,  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
1,500  hours,  costing  .043  per  hour,  and  furnishing  431  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

LISBON,    Iowa.,    plant,   $5,000;    coal,    $2.50  per   ton;    operating 

expenses,  $1,500  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $200  ;  depreciation,  $250  ; 
taxes  and  insiirance,  $25  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $250 ;  making  $2,225, 
less  income,  $1,000,  and  we  have  $625,  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
1,500  hours,  costing  X)32  per  hour,  and  furnishing  625  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

LEON,  Iowa,  plant,  $13,000;  coal,  $1.90  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $3,100;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $780  ;  depreciation,  $650; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $180  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $500 ;  making 
$5,160,  less  income,  $3,300,  and  we  have  $1,860,  cost  of  54  16-candle  power 
incandescent  lights  for  streets  burned  until  10.30  o'clock  only,  on  moon- 
light schedule,  being  $34.44  per  lamp  per  year. 

LOGANSPORT,  Ind.,  plant,  $130,665.45;  natural  gas;  operating 
expenses,  $23,073.35  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $6,583.27  ;  depreciation, 
$6,583.27  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  $1,306.65;  making  $37,446.54,  less  income, 
$19,946.77,  and  we  have  $17,499.77,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  4,000 
hours,  costing  .024  per  hour,  and  furnishing  833  candle  power  per  hour 
for  one  cent. 

96 


The  plaut  ■was  installed  in  1895,  and  in  1890,  they  had  to  put  in  new 
boilers  and  engines,  at  au  expense  of  !5r2.4i)1.24. 

The  net  earnings  in  189U  were  8~,00U  less  than  the  previous  year. 

In  an  open  discussion  Councilman  Boyer  charged  that  "  There  was 
mismanagement  in  operating  the  plaut." 

Councilman  Thos.  Austin  asserted  that  the  plant  was  not  making 
expenses,  and  that,  by  reasons  of  expenditures  from  the  general  fund, 
private  citizens  who  did  not  have  the  service  were  pajing  taxes  to  give 
their  neighbors  luxuries,  which  consumers  should  pay  themselves,  and 
that  it  was  evident  that  the  city  was  losing  money. 

We  have  here  an  illustration  of  how  a  municipal  plant  operates  when 
controlled  by  politics. 

The  present  administration  is  democratic,  and  when  the  plant  was 
initiated  it  was  republican,  and  the  democrats  saj'  they  cannot  raise  rates, 
as  it  would  re-act  on  the  part}-,  showing  the  business  management  of 
municipalities. 

A  Committee  from  Washington,  Ind.,  who  %nsited  Logansport,  were 
told  that  the  city  was  lighted  free  of  cost  ;  that  a  dwelling  house  with  14 
lights  only  paid  08  cents  per  month  for  the  whole  number. 

LEWISTON,  Me.,  plant,  :?2;5,000;  water  power  ;  operating  expenses, 
$8,000  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $1,000  ;  depreciation,  $1,250  ;  taxes  and 
insurance,  $250;  water  rent.  $700  ;  making  $11,200,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  4,000  hours,  costing  .0178  per  hour,  furnishing  G74  candle  power 
per  hour  for  one  cent. 

LANSING,  Mich.,  plant,  $10fi,000  ;  coal,  $3.25  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses.  $18,000  ;  interest  at  live  per  cent,  $5,300;  depreciation,  $5,800  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $1,000  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $3,000  ;  making 
$32,000,  lees  income.  $20,000,  and  we  have  $12,000,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  4,000  hours,  costing  .0253  per  hour,  and  furnishing  790  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

The  mayor  says  : 

"  That  the  plant  has  cost  $106,000,  and  is  far  from  being  worth  any 
such  amount,  and  in  thus  doing  business  the  city  is  really  engaged  in 
wholesale  larceny. 

"  If  the  (luestion  was  now,  for  the  first  time,  presented  to  the  city 
whether  they  should  embark  in  the  business  of  furnishing  commercial 
lights,  I  should  most  assuredly  say  that  it  should  nt)t.  We  cannot  sell  it 
for  anything  like  its  cost.  We  ought  to  go  out  of  the  business,  and 
charge  the  loss  up  to  experiment  fund." 

Their  lights  were  so  unsatisfactory  that  they  paid  an  expert  $400  to 
tell  them  how  to  remedy  the  evil,  and  he  told  them  they  must  spend 
^(5,000  in  order  to  stop  the  trouble. 

LYONS,  Iowa.  The  city  auditor,  with  two  other  officials,  made  an 
investigation  of  the  oi)eratiug  expenses  of  the  municipal  plant  for  ten 
years,  and  they  found  that,  prior  to  January  1.  1807,  the  average  expeuses 
of  the  plaut  had  been  $113  i)er  lamp  per  year,  with  a  1,200  candle  ))ower 

97 

iV 


lamp  operating  on  a  moonlight  schedule  to  midnight.  These  are  the 
facts  as  found  bj'  the  city  officials,  showing  that  the  cost  was  .0773 
per  hour,  and  only  furnishing  155  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

MIAMISBURG,  Ohio,  plant,  $11,000;  coal,  .fl.72perton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $3,377.92  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $550  ;  depreciation,  $550  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $110  ;  making  $4,587.92,  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
2,000  hours,  costing  .0395  per  hour,  and  furnishing  500  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

MARSEILLES,  111.,  plant,  $30,000;  water  power:  operating 
expenses,  $2,500;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $1,800  :  depreciation.  $1,800  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $300  ;  making  $6,100,  less  income,  $3,500,  and  we 
have  $2,600,  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned  3,500  hours,  costing  .0148  per 
hour,  and  furnishing  1,351  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

MARTINSVILLE,  Ind.  Street  lighting  is  done  by  the  city.  No 
account  is  kept  of  the  cost  of  operation. 

MONTPELIER,  Ohio,  plant,  $15,000;  coal,  $2.50  per  ton;  oper- 
ating expenses,  $3,417.79;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $900  ;  depreciation, 
$750  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  $100  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $750;  making 
$5,917.79,  less  income,  $3,542.21,  and  we  have  $2,375.58,  as  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .0405  per  hour,  and  furnishing  430 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

MATTOON,  111.,  plant,  $20,000  ;  coal,  75  cents  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $4,375.36  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent.  $1,000  ;  depreciation, 
$1,000;  taxes  and  insurance,  $100;  making  $6,475.36,  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0297  per  hour,  and  furnishing  673 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

MADISON,  N.  J.,  has  a  municipal  plant,  and  at  a  meeting  of  the 
city  council.  Councilman  Anderson  stated  that  "It  is  a  condition  and 
not  a  theory  that  effects  the  borough  of  Madison.  We  are  like  a  man 
in  business  who  owes  a  bonded  indebtedness  of  $115,000.  The  annual 
interest  upon  this  bonded  debt  is  $5,750,  annual  expenses  of  conducting 
the  business,  $13,184.25,  making  a  total  of  $18,934.25.  Deduct  from  this 
the  revenue,  $14,400,  andit  shows  an  annual  loss  of  $4,534.25.  Of  course  the 
bonded  indebtedness  will  not  be  paid,  and  the  plant  each  year  is  becom- 
ing less  valuable.  Finally  it  will  be  comparatively  worthless,  the  bonds 
unpaid  a  floating  debt,  and  no  funds  on  hand,  thus  leaving  the  borough 
in  a  worse  financial  condition  each  year.  It  will  be  seen  also  that  a 
large  number  enjoy  water  and  lights  which  others  pay  for.''''  This 
councilman's  statement,  as  given  above,  shows  a  loss  each  year  of  $4,534.25, 
not  including  anything  for  depreciation  or  taxes,  and  this  showing  in- 
cludes the  water  works,  which,  we  are  told,  when  run  in  connection  with 
electric  lights,  reduce  the  cost  very  largely.     Such  facts  disclosed  by  a 

98 


member  of  the  city  council,  in  n  discussion  at  one  of  their  meetiu^^s  prove 
very  clearly  that  the  reports  sent  out  by  advocates  of  municipal  owner, 
ship  and  claiming  that  the  business  at  Madison  was  a  success  are  not  in 
accoraauce  with  the  facts  or  the  true  condition. 

MCSHAWAKA,  Ind.,  plant.  $30,000;  coal,  $1.98  per  ton:  oper- 
ating expenses,  *;8,000 :  interest  at  (J  per  cent,  ."11,800;  depreciation, 
!i!l,")00  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  ."ftSOO  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  !t;l,l;')0  ; 
making  $13,750,  lesrf  income,  $7,000,  and  we  have  $5,750,  as  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  2,200  hours,  costing  .05  per  hour,  and  furnishing  400  can- 
dle power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

MTJNCIE,  Ind.,  plant,  $;]0,000;  coal,  $2. 65  per  ton;  operating  expenses, 
$5,781  ;  interest  at  4  percent,  $1,200;  depreciation,  $1,500;  taxes  and 
insurance,  $300;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $1,000  ;  making  $0,781,  cost 
of  street  lights  burned  3,200  hours,  costing  .0209  per  hour,  and  furnish- 
ing 956  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

MEADVILLE,  Pa.,  plant,  $20,000;  coal,  $2.16perton;  operating  ex- 
penses, $5,500;  interest  at  5  per  cent,  $1,000;  depreciation,  $1,000; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $200  ;  making  $7,700,  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
3,500  hours,  costing  .02  per  hour,  and  furnishing  1,000  caudle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

MARSHALLTOWN,  Iowa,  has  been  cited  in  numerous  places  as 
showing  a  remarkal)le  record  and  success  of  its  municipal  plant.  At 
the  convention  in  Columbus  the  mayor  of  Marshalltowu  made  a  report 
of  that  plant.  It  was  stated  in  his  report  that  the  water-works  bonds 
had  been  refunded  at  4  per  cent  interest  ;  that  three  men  were  emploj'ed 
in  the  water-works  plant ;  that  they  paid  each  of  these  men  $5  additional 
salarj'  when  electric  lights  were  started  ;  the  coal  required  to  run  the 
lights  was  given  as  108  tons  per  year.  That  account,  as  reported,  stood 
as  follows : 

"  Interest  on  $10,000  at  5  per  cent,  .$800  ;  renewal  on  $16,000  at  5  per 
cent,  $800;  salary  of  men  at  lighting  station,  $180  ;  lineman,  $720  ;  coal, 
$135  ;  running  expenses,  $200  ;  making  a  total  of  $2,835  for  the  j'ear. 
Thus  the  city  has  the  use  of  98  arc  lamps  of  1,200  candle  power  at  a  cost 
of  $2,835  per  year,  or  $29.50  per  light  per  year." 

In  examining  the  city  clerk's  report  for  1899,  I  find  that  they  are 
paying  4h,  5  and  8  per  cent  interest  upon  their  bonded  debt,  making  an 
average  of  5  6-10  per  cent.  The  plant  cost  $12,000.  and  the  cost  of  mak- 
ing the  addition  to  the  water-works  building  was  $2,000,  and  the  expense 
of  changing  the  dynamos  was  $4,500,  making  a  total  of  .'(;1S,,500.  The  salary 
of  the  men  at  the  lighting  station  was  given  at  $180'per  year.  They  were 
employing  three  men  at  the  station,  and  paid  these  $  ISO  additional  wages, 
but  now  they  have  to  employ  four  men,  one  of  these  being  paid  $00  per 
month,  making  an  expense  of  $720  to  add  to  the  electric  light  paj'  roll, 
and  a  total  of  $1,620  per  year.     Cost  of  coal  was  given  at  108  tons,  cost- 

99 


ing  $135  per  year,  while  the  report  shows  that  they  used  last  year  452j 
tons,  costing  $565.  All  running  expenses  were  given  as  $200.  They 
claim  to  burn  98  lamps ;  this  would  require  at  least  one  and  one-half  car- 
bons per  lamp  per  night,  and  if  only  burned  300  nights  in  the  year, 
would  make  a  total  of  44,100  carbons,  at  $10  per  thousand  would  be  $441. 

Therefore,  we  have  the  following:  Pay  roll,  $1,620;  coal,  $565; 
carbons,  $441  ;  interest  on  118,500  at  5  6-10  per  cent,  $1,036  ;  deprecia- 
tion at  rate  made  by  mayor,  $925  ;  taxes,  $35 ;  making  a  total  of  $4,622, 
being  $48.14  per  year,  and  costing  .0228  cents  per  hour,  and  furnishing 
520  candle  power  for  one  cent. 

In  the  above  calculation  nothing  is  included  for  repairs  upon  engine, 
dynamo,  belts,  or  for  oil,  brushes,  office  expenses,  lamps,  or  water  rent. 
A  private  company  at  Jackson,  Mich.,  deliver  the  lights  at  a  cost  of 
.0178  cents  per  hour,  furnishing  1123  candle  power  for  one  cent.  There 
is  nothing  very  remarkable  in  the  record  at  Marshalltown  except  the 
fact  that  they  burn  the  lights  a  few  hours  each  night  a  part  of  every 
month. 

The  private  company  at  Jackson  is  furnishing  597  more  candle 
power  for  one  cent  than  is  furnished  by  the  municipal  plant  at  Marshall- 
town.  The  plan  of  charging  nearly  all  the  expenses  to  the  water  works 
does  not  relieve  the  tax  payers.  That  this  has  been  done  in  Marshall- 
town  is  evident.  An  examination  of  the  council  proceedings  for  Aug. 
14,  1899,  shows  that  the  only  expense  for  the  month  of  July  charged  to 
the  electric  light  was  one  lineman's  wages  of  $00,  and  a  small  item  for 
supplies,  while  in  the  water-works  account  we  find  $466  charged  as  pay 
roll,  and  $325  charged  for  wages  of  engineers  and  superintendent,  be- 
sides all  the  oil,  waste,  and  repairs.  The  report  says:  "Installed  14 
new  arc  lights,"  but  there  is  nothing  to  show  that  they  cost  a  cent.  Who 
paid  for  them,  and  to  what  account  were  they  charged?  They  also  have 
on  hand  two  arc  dynamos,  which  cost  in  1887,  over  $6,000,  and  now  can- 
not be  sold  for  more  than  ^600.  thus  making  a  loss  of  $5,400  to  the  tax- 
payers. This  has  not  been  considered  in  the  above  calculations  of  cost. 
Statement  was  made  that  "the  water  works  pays  all  running  expenses 
and  interest  on  the  debt,  for  all  extensions  and  repairs,  and  left  the  city 
several  thousand  dollars  profit."  Why,  if  this  is  the  case,  was  a  three- 
mill  tax  on  the  dollar  for  water  works  voted  Aug.  14,  1899  'i 

MACON,  Mo. ,  plant  cost  $50,000  ;  40  arc,  2,000  candle  power.  The 
electric  lights  and  water  works  run  as  one  plant,  and  no  way  of  separating 
accounts.  The  operating  expenses,  including  interest,  depreciation  and 
taxes,  amounted  to  §11,300,  charging  only  one-half  to  the  electric  lights, 
gives  $5,900  for  the  year,  less  income  from  incandescent  lights,  $2,500, 
leaves  a  net  expenditure  of  $3,400  for  40  street  lights,  being  $85  per  lamp 
per  year,  costing  .0226  per  hour,  and  furnishing  884  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

MARIETTA,  Ohio,  plant,  $21,000;  naturalgas;  operating  expenses, 
$6,592,75;  interest  at  four  and  one-half  per  cent,  $945;   depreciation, 

100 


$l,OoO;  taxes  and  insurance,  SSIO  ;  sinking  fund  to  puj'  bonds,  8750; 
umkiii','  *!),.'J47.7"),  cost  of  street  li<?bts  Imrned  4,000  hours,  costiujt?  .0^13 
per  hour,  and  t'uruishiuj?  1)88  caudle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

luterviewinf?  a  prominent  citizen,  he  said  : 

Marietta  owned  the  electric  li^rht  |)laut  and  a  theater  ;  that  six  of  the 
council  refused  to  act  any  louprer  for  love  or  money  ;  that  i)olitics  was  in 
c'luuire  of  the  lousiness  :  but  that  they  lived  in  hopes,  uh  their  lunatic 
asylum  was  only  40  miles  away. 

MARTINS  FERRY,  Ohio.  i>limt,  IsHO.OOO  ;  coal,  Gl  cents  per  ton  ; 
operatiufx  expenses,  t7,S4!).4()  ;  interest  at  five  jier  cent,  81.500  ;  dei)re- 
ciatiou,  ^1,500;  taxes  and  insurance,  8'!00;  sinking  fund  ttj  pay  bonds, 
^1,000  ;  making  813, r)4'.),  less  income,  ^3,!)20,  and  we  have  88,72!),  cost  of 
street  lights  burned  3.000  hours,  costing  .0285  per  hour,  and  furnishing 
701  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

MARSHALL,  Mich.,  plant,  850,000;  water  power;  operating 
expenses,  83,S00  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent.  82,500;  depreciation,  82,500  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  8500  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  82,000  ;  making 
811,300,  less  income,  84,500,  and  we  have  8<>.800,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0404  per  hour,  and  furnishing  4i)5  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

MOUNT  PLEASANT,  Iowa,  plant,  822,000;  coal,  81.95  per  ton  ; 
operating  exi)euses,  83,000:  interest  at  five  per  cent,  81,100;  deprecia- 
tion, $1,100;  taxes  and  insurance,  8220;  making  85.420,  less  income, 
83,000,  and  we  have  82,420.  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,000  hours, 
costing  .0101  per  hour,  and  furnishing  49()  candle  power  per  hour  for  one 
cent. 

MAZOMANIE,  Wis.,  plant,  810,000;  coal,  83..55  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  82,000;  interest  at  live  per  cent,  8500;  depreciation,  8500; 
taxes  and  insurance,  8100;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  8500:  making 
82.000,  less  income,  82,000,  and  we  have  •'^'OOO,  cost  of  incandescent  street 
light  l)urned  until  eleven  o'clock  each  night,  costing  $10.00  per  him|)  per 
year. 

MARBLEHEAD,  Mass.,  plant,  $85,518;  have  1,G00  candle  power 
lamps,  and  cost,  as  shown  by  the  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Commissioners 
of  the  state,  808.75  per  year,  burned  3,000  hours,  costing  .0220  per  hour, 
and  furnishing  08!)  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

They  also  use  30  candle  power  incaudescents,  costing  817.73  per 
3'ear,  and  IG  caudle  power,  8!^.42,  and  25  candle  power  at  a  cost  of  .814.70 
per  year. 

MIDDLEBORO,  Mass.,  plant,  8100,494  ;  have  1,200  candle 
power  lamps,  and  cost,  as  shown  by  the  statement  of  the  Gas  and  Electric 
Light  Commissioners,  for  lights  burned  until  midnight,  8102.47,  and 
those  Vmrned  all  night,  818G.31.     The  midnight  lamps  burned  1,272  hours, 

101 


costing  .08  per  hour,  and  furnishing  150  candle  power  per  hour  for  one 
cent.  The  all  night  lamps  burned  2,313  hours,  costing  .08  per  hour,  and 
furnishing  150  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

The  New  Bedford  Standard  says  : 

"  Middleboro's  experiment  in  the  municipal  ownership  of  a 
lighting  plant  shows  that  something  more  than  the  mere  ownership  of 
engines  and  dynamos  and  poles  and  wires  is  essential  to  the  success  of 
such  a  venture.  Middleboro  is  a  thriving  place.  It  has  an  intelli- 
gent population.  Many  of  its  inhabitants  are  more  than  ordinarily 
successful  business  men.  Yet  the  lighting  experiment  under  the  direc- 
tion of  the  town  is  confessedly  a  fiat  failure.  It  is  horrible  costly,  so 
costly,  in  fact,  that  it  is  impossible  to  figure  out  one  of  those  rosy  state- 
ments with  which  the  advocates  of  municipal  lighting  plants  are  wont  to 
regale  the  people.  We  have  heard  it  intimated  that  there  has  been  bad 
management.     There  certainly  has  not  been  harmonious  management. 

MADISONVILLE,  Ohio,  plant,  $30,000;  coal,  $1.85  per  ton  ;  oper- 
ating expenses,  $4,631  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $1,500;  depreciation, 
•$1,500  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  $150  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $1,500  ; 
making  $9,431,  less  income,  $5,119,  and  we  have  $4,313,  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  1,500  hours,  costing  ,0378  per  hour,  and  furnishing  317 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

MARION,  Ind.,  plant,  $24,000;  natural  gas ;  operating  expenses, 
$5,500;  interest  at  four  and  one-half  per  cent,  $1,080;  depreciation, 
$1,200;  taxes  and  insurance,  $240;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $1,200; 
making  $9,220,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0281 
per  hour,  and  furnishing  711  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

MORGAN  PARK,  111.,  plant,  $5,500  ;  coal,  $1.85  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $1,500  ;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  1330  ;  depreciation,  ■■j-275  ; 
making  $2,105,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  1,400  hours,  costing  .03  per 
hour,  and  furnishing  666  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

The  authorities  state  that  all  the  operating  expenses,  except  the 
salaries,  are  charged  to  the  water  works, 

MARaXJETTE,  Mich.,  plant,  $100,000;  water  power ;  operating 
expenses,  $6,855.35;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $5,000;  depreciation, 
$5,000;  taxes,  $500;  sinking  fund  to  pay  maturing  bonds,  $4,750; 
making  $22,105.35,  less  income,  $9,473.61,  and  we  have  $12,631.74,  as  cost 
of  street  lights  burned  4,000  hours,  costing  .0263  per  hour,  and  furnish- 
ing 760  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

MORRISVILLE,  Vt.,  plant,  $25,000  ;  water  power  ;  operating 
expenses,  $2,800  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $1,000  ;  depreciation,  $1,250  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  ■'150  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $1,000  ;  making 
$6,100,  less  income,  $3,550,  and  we  have  $2,550,  as  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .0809  per  hour,  and  furnishing  247  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

102 


NORTH  EAST,  Pa.,  plant,  s9,000  ;  ooal,  81.05  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $2,200 ;  interest  at  five  per  cent.  .*4o0  ;  depreciation,  •*450 ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  *90  ;  making  *3,190.  less  income,  $1,500,  and  we 
have  !?l,6fl0,  as  cost  of  street  lights  bnrued  1.500  hours,  costing  .04  per 
hour,  and  furnishing  500  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

NEGAUNEE,  Mich.,  furnishes  a  fair  illustration  of  municipal 
ownership.  Thej'  believed  the  statements  of  parties  who  were  trying  to 
sell  them  a  plant,  and.  after  it  was  installed  and  operated  a  couple  of 
years,  they  found  it  was  a  loosing  aftair,  and  finally  employed  two 
experts  from  Chicago  to  make  a  thorough  investigation  and  report  cost 
of  lights  furnished  by  the  municipal  plant. 

The  following  report  of  these  experts  to  the  mayor  and  council  shows 
fully  the  working  of  such  business  : 
7'o  the  honorable  mayor  and  common  council  of  the  city  of  Negaunee  : 

GextIiEMEN  : 

"  We  beg  to  submit  herewith  our  report,  based  upon  an  examination 
of  the  books  of  the  electric  light  plant  and  water  plant,  the  examination 
being  made,  as  per  your  instructions,  to  determine  what  the  actual  cost 
per  year  for  the  lighting  plant  has  been  to  the  city,  and  from  this  to 
determine  how  much  it  is  costing  the  city  for  arc  lamps  for  street 
lighting. 

'•  We  find  that  the  accounts  of  the  two  plants  are  really  kept  in  three 
sets  of  bookfi.  One  set  for  water,  which  books  are  intended  to  show  the 
expenditures  and  receipts  of  what  might  be  called  books  covering  the 
operation  of  the  plant.  A  similar  set  are  kept  for  the  electric  light,  the 
third  set  being  the  city  department  books. 

•  "While  the  books  checked  and  balanced  with  each  other  on  the 
various  accounts  examined  by  the  writers,  the  methods  employed  in 
keeping  these  accounts  is  not  such  as  shows  the  true  cost  to  the  city 
of  either  the  water  plant  or  the  electric  light  plant.  Prior  to  the 
installation  of  the  electric  light  plant,  there  being  but  one  set  of 
operating  accounts,  all  charges,  receipts,  disbursements,  etc.,  were 
necessarily  charged  to  the  water  account,  so  that  a  true  statement  could 
be  very  easily  arrived  at. 

'•  Under  the  present  arrangement,  both  the  electric  light  station  and 
pumping  station  being  operated  under  the  same  roof,  iising  fuel  jointly, 
likewise,  oil.  waste,  etc..  and  the  labor  account  being  divided  between  the 
two  plants,  it  will  reciuire  a  very  careful  set  of  records  being  kept  of  the 
station,  and  necessitate  the  accounts  being  more  segregated,  and  much, 
more  carefully  kept  at  the  clerk's  office,  in  order  to  ever  be  able  to 
determine  how  much  each  station  is  costing  the  city  of  Negaunee  per 
year  to  operate.  The  actual  output  of  the  pumping  station  can  only  be 
guessed  at  in  gallons,  and  as  to  the  output  of  the  electric  light  station 
the  same  can  be  said.  It  must  be  evident  to  you  that,  unless  the  relative 
outputs  are  known,  and  the  efficiencies  of  the  apparatus,  it  is  absolutely 
impossible  to  tell  what  proportion  of  the  fuel  used  should  be  charged  to 
the  pumping  station  and  what  to  the  lighting  station. 

103 


"A  careful  examination,  however,  of  the  accounts  of  the  pumping 
station,  prior  to  the  electric  light  plant  being  put  in  and  operated  in 
conjunction  with  same,  should  show,  within  a  reasonable  limit,  whether 
too  much  is  now  being  charged  to  the  pumping  station  or  not  enough, 
and  from  the  records  it  would  seem  to  show  that  entirely  too  much  was 
being  charged  against  the  pumping  station,  as,  for  instance,  the  running 
expense  account,  as  shown  in  the  pumping  station  ledger  for  the  fiscal 
year  1897  to  1898,  and  then  from  1898  to  1899,  is  as  fol 

Operating  expenses,  '97  to  '98 $4,497  44 

Income  of  earnings, 7,392  19 


Net  earnings, 

Operating  expenses,  '98  to  '99, 
Income  of  earnings, 


$2,894  75 

$5,884  88 
6,970  29 

Net  earnings, SI, 085  41 

From  this  you  will  see  that  the  operating  expenses  for  the  fiscal 
year  1898  to  1899  increased  .$1,387.44,  while  the  revenue  for  the  same 
period  decreased  .$421.90.  With  the  exception  of  an  increase  of  .flO  a 
month  for  each  of  the  two  engineers,  there  is  no  apparent  reason  why 
the  cost  of  operation  for  the  year  1898  to  1899  should  have  been  within 
some  ,f  1,.500  of  what  it  was  in  1897  to  1898,  as  over  $2,0U0  was  spent  on 
water  mains  in  1897  to  1898,  whereas  the  accounts  show  that  only  $048.60 
was  spent  in  betterments  and  improvements  on  the  water  plant  from 
1898  to  1899. 

As  the  fiscal  year  for  the  city  begins  each  April  Ist,  and  as  the  light- 
ing plant  started  Sept.  3,  1897,  we  will  only  be  able  to  take  one  com- 
plete year  for  operating  expenses,  receipts,  etc.,  for  the  lighting  plant,  to 
wit :  April,  1898  to  April,  1899.  This  year  is  in  reality  from  March  1st  to 
March  Ist,  rather  than  from  April,  as  the  accounts  are  supposed  to  be 
closed  in  March,  the  recorder  making  a  statement  the  1st  of  April. 

The  following  is  a  copy  of  the  recorder's  report  for  the  electric  light 
station  for  the  fiscal  year  1898  to  1899  : 

RECEIPTS. 

Electric  light,  

Materials  and  lamps,         ....... 

Gross  receipts, 

EXPENDITURES. 

Oil 

Fuel, 

Service, 

Lamps,       .......... 

Euuniug  expenses 

Salar^^,       .......... 

Gross  expenses 

or  a  balance  in  favor  of  electric  light  plant  of      . 


$4,346  25 

304  90 

$4,651 

15 

$   66 

96 

1,444 

94 

147 

28 

147 

19 

62  65 

2,0.50  00 

$3,919  02 

732 

13 

104 


The  above  balance  of  $732,13  means  that  the  cit3',  after  paying  io  per 
month  per  arc  li^ht  and  $25.25  per  month  for  incandescent  light- 
ing, which  lights  are  in  the  city  hall,  engine  and  hose  houses 
and  band  stand,  still  has  ^732.13,  to  be  credited  to  cost  of  op- 
eration. This  statement  is  apparently  true  as  far  as  monej'S  i)aid  out 
through  orders  from  the  recorder's  office  and  moneys  received  at  the  re- 
corder's office,  but  is  by  no  means  true  statement  as  to  the  cost  per 
year  of  the  plaut  to  the  city. 

To  get  the  true  cost  of  operating  any  business,  and  particularl.v  an 
electric  light  station,  factory  or  an}'  place  where  there  is  machinerj'  and 
material  which  depreciates  more  or  less  rapidly',  iuadditiou  to  the  actual 
operating  expenses,  that  is  such  expenses  as  represent  fuel,  oil,  labor, 
etc. ,  a  certain  depreciation  must  be  charged  as  well  as  interest  on  invest- 
ment, to  show  a  true  statement  as  to  the  actual  cost  of  the  station,  fac- 
tory or  what  not  per  year. 

The  cost  of  the  plant  to  the  cit^',  as  shown  by  the  electric  light 
books,  March  15, 181*8,  is  811,G92.23,  this  including  the  original  contract 
price  of  $9,1)74,  and  the  addition  to  building  at  the  power  station  of  $37(3, 
or  a  total  of  $10,350,  the  $1,342.83  including  labor  and  material  which 
had  been  put  into  the  plant  from  the  date  of  starting  to  the  above  date. 

This  is  not  a  true  statement  as  to  the  cost  of  the  plaut,  for  the  writer 
finds  in  the  city  department  books  that  $1,U00  was  transferred  in  Sep- 
tember, 1897,  and  >;2,000  was  transferred  from  city  water  fund  to  electric 
light  fund,  and  further  that  paj'ments  made  to  F.  B.  Eae,  engineer 
for  the  electric  light  plaut,  had  been  charged  to  city  tax  fund  and  not  to 
the  electric  light  plaut,  this  amount  being  $002.75,  or  at  least  this  is  all 
the  charge  that  can  be  found  against  his  account,  and  as  the  onlj'  way  of 
finding  same  is  to  go  through  the  stubs  of  check  books  or  through  the 
jourual  entries  of  the  city  department.  This  $3,002.75,  which  has  been 
added  to  the  cost  of  the  electric  light  plant,  makes  a  total  of  $15,355.58 
for  the  true  cost  of  the  plaut  to  April,  1899. 

During  the  fiscal  year  1898  to  1899,  $830.44  is  charged  to  account  of 
electric  light  plant  construction,  which  should  represent  an  additional 
value  to  the  plant,  but  examination  of  account  shows  that  at  least  50  per 
cent  of  this  amount  should  be  charged  to  running  expenses.  Dividing 
this  account  and  putting  half  of  it  in  betterments  and  improvements 
brings  the  total  cost  of  the  plant  to  April,  1899.  to  $15,773.80. 

The  total  expense  of  the  plaut  for  the  j'ear  ending  April,  1899,  is 
$4,757.90,  and  from  this  we  will  deduct  $418.22.  to  get  the  operating  ex- 
penses, making  84,339.74,  as  the  cost  of  operating  for  the  j-ear  ending 
1899. 

The  depreciation  in  your  plant  we  will  take  at  five  percent,  although 
you  will  find  that  the  depreciation  in  the  cost  of  this  plant  will  be  very 
much  greater  than  five  and  much  nearer  ten  per  cent,  but  we  will  take 
five,  as  that  was  the  estimate  made  by  your  consulting  engineer,  who  in- 
stalled the  plant.  We  will  also  allow  a  five  per  cent  interest  on  invest- 
ment, or  a  total  of  ten  per  cent  on  $15,773.80,  or  $1,577.38,  which  is  to 
be  added  to  your  operating  expenses  of  $4,339.74,  giving  a  total  cost  to 

105 


the  city  for  the  operation  of  the  electric  light  plant  of  $5,917.12  for  the 
last  fiscal  year. 

Your  books  show  a  total  earning  of  |4, 651. 1.5,  which  leaves  a  deficit 
of  .fl, 265.97,  instead  of  a  profit  of  $732.13,  or  a  difference  of  *1, 998.10 
between  the  April  statement,  as  shown  by  your  books,  and  the  correct 
statement. 

"  As  the  receipts  did  not  equal  the  cost  of  operation  by  $1,265.97,  and, 
as  the  incandescent  lighting  for  the  city  is  but  a  small  item,  to  determine 
the  real  cost  of  an  arc  lamp  per  year,  we  should  divide  this  amount  by 
the  average  number  of  lamps  which  have  been  in  service,  viz.,  35,  and 
add  same  to  the  amount  charged  to  the  city,  viz.,  t60  per  year  per  light, 
which  brings  the  cost  to  193.33,  as  the  cost  to  the  city  per  arc  lamp  for 
street  lighting  on  a  moonlight  schedule. 

"In  the  first  part  of  this  report,  your' attention  was  called  to  the 
increase  in  cost  of  operating  the  plant  and  the  decreased  revenue  received 
from  the  pumping  station  since  the  electric  light  plant  had  been  in 
operation,  viz.,  in  the  year  1898  to  1899  the  cost  of  operation  increased 
$1,387.44,  and  the  revenue  decreased  $421.90. 

"As  the  division  of  the  operating  expenses  l)etween  these  two  has 
been,  necessarily,  guessed  at.  it  is  but  logical  to  assume  that  this  increase  in 
the  water  plant  is  due,  to  a  large  extent,  to  charges  being  made  to  the 
water  plant,  in  the  way  of  fuel,  material,  etc.,  which  should  have  been 
made  to  the  electric  light.  A  most  conservative  estimate  would  be  to 
charge.$500  of  this  $1,387.44  back  to  the  electric  light,  for,  as  previously 
shown,  the  city  added  $2,213.11  to  the  value  of  the  pumping  station  from 
1897  to  1898,  and  only  $648.60  from  1898  to  1899,  yet  the  total  cost  of 
operating  from  1898  to  1899  was  over  $1,300  more  than  the  preceding 
year,  and  the  only  visible  increase  legitimately  should  have  been  $240, 
in  the  way  of  increase  of  salary  of  the  two  engineers.  Taking  this  $500 
as  an  increase  in  the  cost  of  operation  would  bring  the  cost  per  arc  lamp 
to  the  city  for  the  last  year  $106.49. 

"  The  cost  of  coal  has  been  $2.78  per  ton  until  August  1st,  and  the 
writer  is  advised  that  since  that  date  the  city  has  had  to  pay  .$3.40  per 
ton,  or  an  increase  of  some  22  per  cent.  Taking  the  coal  bills  for  last 
year,  as  shown  by  the  electric  light  books,  as  a  basis,  this  additional  22 
per  cent  for  the  cost  of  coal  still  further  increases  the  cost  of  the  arc 
lights  $8  per  year,  or,  in  other  words,  if,  during  the  past  year,  you  had 
to  pay  13.40  per  ton  for  coal,  which  is  what  you  will  now  have  to  pay, 
your  arc  lights  would  cost  $114.49  each  per  year  to  operate. 

"  We  figure  that  the  total  expense  to  the  city  for  the  electric  plant 
to  April,  1899,  including  cost  of  plant,  interest  on  investment,  deprecia- 
tion, and  operating  expenses  is  $23,198.96,  and  the  total  receipts 
$6,524.43." 

This  makes  the  lights  burned  2,200  hours,  costing  .052  per  hour,  and 
furnishing  384  caudle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

The  following  editorial  from  Iron  Ore,  published  at  Ishpenning, 
Mich. ,  covers  the  case  fully  : 

106 


"The  Negftunee  plaut  has  been  losing  money  steadily  since  its 
installation. 

"  Au  expert  was  secured  to  ti^jure  this  out  for  the  administration  of 
local  affairs  in  that  towu,  and  he  discovered  that  it  was  equal  to  some  of 
the  new  copper  stocks  as  a  returner  of  dividends  for  the  niouey  invested. 

"  We  know  that  municipalities  which  have  adopted  self  lightinj^are 
prone  to  give  their  pets  the  best  of  it,  and  to  help  them  out  with  funds 
from  other  accounts,  and  to  charge  up  costs  that  should  go  to  lighting  to 
some  other  accounts,  this  lieiug  done  in  order  to  show  the  wisdom  of 
their  directing  things.  It  wouldn't  be  good  for  them  politically  to 
acknowledge  such  an  error. 

"  The  curse  of  muuicijial  ownership  of  things  is  political  operation. 
It  would  not  be  a  question  of  economy,  but  of  who  could  be  at  the  head 
and  get  the  fat  that  could  be  tried  out  of  the  carcass. 

"  The  business  of  the  tax  payer  would  be  prostituted  by  the  gentle- 
men of  leisure  who  want  to  be  kept  in  soft  positions  at  the  expense  of 
those  who  pay  taxes. 

"  And,  as  is  common,  it  would  not  be  the  tax  payers  who  would  be 
sitting  up  nights  trj'iug  to  figure  out  how  the3'  could  hold  these  fat 
takes. 

"  It  is  a  sure  thing  that  the  tax  payers  of  this  citj-  would  see  to  the 
eti'ectual  killing  of  anj-  proposition  for  the  city  to  go  into  the  lighting 
business,  for  the  sake  of  providing  soft  places  for  a  few  gentlemen  who 
vere  born  tired. 

•'  The  movement  has  nothing  in  it  but  politics.  It  is  a  movement  to 
help  the  gentlemen  who  desire  to  remain  in  office,  and  hope  to  create 
a  little  excitement  favorable  to  their  desires." 

NORTHFIELD,  Vt..  plant,  $40,042.29;  water  power;  operating 
expenses.  i^T.OUU  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  82,000  ;  depreciation,  82,000  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  >'400  ;  making  ^11,400,  less  income,  ^5,0U0.  and  we 
have  ■?G,400,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,000  hours,  and  costing  !i=2r).00 
per  lamp  per  j'ear  for  incandescent  lamps. 

After  they  installed  the  plaut  the  water  wheels  failed  and  had  to  be 
replaced  with  new  ones,  at  au  expense  of  .'?4,400.  The  dam  also  gave 
out,  and  a  new  one  had  to  be  built,  costing  ^'4,207. r)2.  These  repairs 
were  charged  to  construction,  but  should  have  gone  to  expense. 

Before  the  plant  was  installed  the  total  debt  of  the  village  was 
4:2,082,  now  it  is  i?40,248. 

NEWBERRY,  S.  C,  plant,  .•?0.000  ;  coal,  83.3")  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  .•*3,o00  ;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  ^040;  depreciation,  ^450;  taxes 
and  insurance,  $90;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  >'500;  making  ."?'), OSO,  less 
income,  81,650  ;  and  we  have  83,430,  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,000 
hours,  costing  .035  per  hour,  and  furnishing  571  candle  power  per  hour 
for  one  cent. 


lo: 


NEEDHAM,  Mass.,  plant,  |15,697;  use  25  candle  po^ver  incandes- 
cent for  streets,  and,  as  stated  by  the  Massachusetts  Commissioners, 
cost  f  11.94  per  year,  burned  1,249  hours. 

NORTH  ATTLEBORO,  Mass.,  plant.  |58,421  ;  have  82  can- 
dle power  incandescent  for  streets,  costing,  as  shown  by  the  Gas  and 
Electric  Light  Commissioners,  --IIO.OG  per  year,  burned  1,249  hours. 

ORTONVILLE,  Minn.,  plant,  if^lO.OOO  ;  coal,  $(j  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $2,145.48  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $500  ;  depreciation,  $500  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $100 ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $500  ;  making 
$3,745.48,  less  income,  $1,668.96.  and  we  have  $2,076.42,  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0692  per  hour,  and  furnishing  289 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

OVID,  Mich,  plant,  $10,000;  coal,  $2.66  per  ton;  operating  ex- 
penses, $3,700;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $400  ;  depreciation,  $500  ;  taxes 
and  insurance,  $100;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds.  $500  ;  making  $5,200, 
less  income, $2, 720,  and  we  have  $2,480,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  1,500 
hours,  costing  ,0688  per  hour,  and  furnishing  290  candle  per  hour  for 
one  cent. 

OSAGE  CITY,  Kan.,  plant,  $10,000  ;  coal,  $1.90  per  ton  ;  operat- 
ing expenses,  $2,000  ;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $600;  depreciation,  $500; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $100;  sinking  fund  to  pa^-  bonds,  $500;  making 
$3,700,  less  income,  $1,300,  and  we  have  $2,400,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .0355  per  hour,  and  furnishing  563  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

OXFORD,  Ohio,  plant,  $35,000  ;  coal,  $3.60  per  ton  ;  operating  ex- 
penses, $5,073  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $1,400  ;  depreciation,  $1,750  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $350  ;  making  $8,573,  less  income,  $5,432,  and  we 
have  $3,141,  as  cost  of  street  lights'  burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .051  per 
hour,  and  furnishing  392  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

PAINESVILLE,  Ohio,  plant,  $12,500  ;  coal,  $2.15  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $4,300  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $500  ;  depreciation,  $625  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $100  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $625  ;  making 
$6,150,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2.000  hours,  costing  .0353  per  hour, 
and  furnishing  566  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

PORTLAND,  Mich.,  plant,  $20,000  ;  water  power  ;  operating 
expenses,  $2,000  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $1,000  ;  depreciation,  $1,000  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  |200 ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $975  ;  making 
$5,175,  less  income,  $3,600,  and  we  have  $1,575,  as  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .03  per  hour,  and  furnishing  400  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

108 


PADUCAH,  Ky.,  plant.  840.000;  coal,  $1  per  ton:  operatingr 
expenses.  8T.000  ;  interest  at  live  per  cent,  .*'2.000;  depreciation,  *2,U0U; 
taxes  and  insurance.  .'s400  ;  making  ■511.400.  cost  of  street  lights  bnrued 
3,0'i0  hours,  costing  .O'SUt  per  hour,  and  furnishing  032  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

An  interview  of  prominent  citizens  disclosed  the  fact  that  the  plant 
was  merely  a  political  factor,  and  the  city  authorities  refused  to  give  any 
information,  even  to  tax  pavers,  as  to  the  cost  of  running  the  plant. 

Horses  and  feed  purchased  for  the  use  of  the  plant  are  charged  to 
the  fire  department,  and  other  things  in  the  same  way. 

One  prominent  tax  payer  stated  that  the  physical  condition  of  the 
plant  had  deteriorated,  and  very  little  attention  has  been  shown  it.  The 
service  has  been  bad,  and  complaints  have  been  made  by  citizens  as  to 
the  (luality  of  light  given. 

PARIS,  111.,  plant,  -^lo.OOO  ;  coal,  $2.25  per  ton  ;  operating  expenses, 
!|3.o00  ;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $900  ;  depreciation.  sJToO  ;  taxes  and 
insurance,  $1.00  ;  making  85.200.  as  cost  of  streetlights  burned  3,000 hours, 
costing  .0173  per  hour,  and  furnishing  093  candle  power  per  hour  for  one 
cent. 

PAW  PAW.  Mich.,  phiut,  $20,000:  water  power;  operating 
expenses.  .$1,300  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  .$1,000  ;  depreciation,  $1,000  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $100  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $7.00  ;  making 
$4,150,  less  income,  81,800,  and  we  have  $2,350,  as  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  1,400  hours,  costing  .0289  per  hour,  and  furnishing  553  caudle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

PLAIN  CITY,  Ohio,  plant,  $12,000  ;  coal,  $2  per  ton  :  operating 
expenses.  $2,333.33:  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $000  ;  depreciation.  $()U0  : 
taxes  and  insurance,  .$120  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds.  $000  ;  making 
$4,853.32.  less  income,  and  we  have  $2,153.32,  as  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .0422  per  hour,  and  furnishing  473  caudle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

PAWNEE  CITY.  Neb.,  plant,  $8,500  ;  coal,  $3.25  per  ton  ;  oper- 
ating expenses,  $2,500  ;  interest  at  seven  per  cent.  $595  ;  depreciation, 
$425 :  taxes  and  insurance,  $85  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bo  mis.  $200  ;  making 
.$3,805,  less  income,  $2,500,  and  we  have  .$1,305,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  1..500  hours,  costing  .0543  per  hour,  and  furnishing  308  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

PEABODY,  Mass.,  plant.  $79,010  ;  have  1,200  candle  power  lamps, 
and  cost  per  j'ear,  as  made  by  the  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Commissioners, 
was  $73.75,  burned  3,100  hours,  costing  .0237  per  hour,  and  furnishing 
500  caudle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

They  also  use  32  candle  power  iucandescents  for  streets,  costing 
.$27.81  per  year,  and  50  candle  power,  costing  .$43.54  per  year.  Iucan- 
descents only  burned  3,100  hours. 

109 


PETOSKEY,  Mich.  The  following  editorial  from  the  local  paper 
in  Petoskey,  Mich. ,  explains  municipal  management : 

"  A   BRIEF    HISTORY   OF   THE     ELECTRIC    LIGHT    INVESTMENTS    OF    THE    CITY 

OF   PETOSKEY. 

"  When  Captain  Rose  owned  the  electric  light  plant  it  was  thought 
that  the  cost  of  street  lighting  was  too  expensive,  and  that  the  city  could 
do  its  own  street  lighting  more  economically.  In  consequence,  it  was 
conceived  and  recommended  by  the  council  and  board  of  public  works 
that  a  plant  be  installed,  to  cost  about  $8,000. 

"  That  amount  was  voted,  whereupon  Captain  Eose  offered  to  sell  his 
entire  plant  to  the  city,  and  the  price  was  agreed  upon  at  f  1G,000.  The 
council  again  recommended  that  the  previous  action  be  dropped,  and 
that  the  $16,000  be  raised  by  bonding,  which  was  also  voted  by  the 
people. 

"After  the  transfer  was  made,  the  council  and  board  of  public 
works  appeared  to  discover  that  the  plant  was  too  ancient,  or  inadequate, 
or  both,  and  for  a  third  time  recommended  that  the  city  mortgage  itself  for 
$12,000,  for  the  purpose  of  repairing  the  building  and  installing  new 
machinery. 

"  The  officials  stated  that  the  improvements  would  not  exceed  that 
amoiint.  What  is  the  result  ?  Not  only  have  these  honorable  city 
officials  dumped  all  the  profits  of  the  plant  into  it,  but  they  drew  $900 
from  funds  other  than  the  electric  fund,  and  over  drew  the  electric  fund 
$600,  as  shown  by  the  Grand  Rapids  expert's  report,  while  the  city  is 
over  $10,000  in  debt  for  loose  accounts,  besides  showing  an  unaccounted 
shortage  of  over  $2,000.  Out  on  the  Charlevoix  road,  and  on  Emmet 
street,  have  stood  for  the  past  year,  and  are  there  to-day,  wireless  poles, 
monuments  to  the  inefficiency,  negligence,  and  mismanagement  of  the 
council  and  board  of  pviblic  works.  Within  a  year  $12,000  was  almost 
unanimously  voted  for  the  purpose  of  modernizing  the  electric  light 
plant.  Now,  what  is  the  result  ?  The  plant  is  over  $10,000  in  debt,  and 
over  $2,000  has  been  squandered,  which  no  one  is  able  to  account  for. 

"  For  nearly  a  whole  year  the  people  have  been  inconvenienced  by 
miserable  lighting  service,  and  half  of  the  time  the  town  was  in  total  • 
darkness. 

"George  A.  Horner,  the  expert  accountant  engaged  by  Mayor 
Barber,  has  finished  his  review  of  the  electric  light  plant  accounts.  The 
results  of  his  work  are  on  file  in  the  office  of  the  city  clerk,  and  should 
be  carefully  inspected  by  every  tax  payer  in  the  city. 

' '  From  a  brief  examination  of  the  figures,  it  appears  that,  instead  of 
the  new  machinery  costing  about  $7,000,  as  our  people  were  first  assured, 
the  cost  has  been  over  $40,000. 

"The  following  is  a  copy  of  the  expert's  report,  as  shown  in  the 
council  room  : 


110 


New  constructiou,            .             .             .             ,             .             .  8'23,145.06 

Old  constructiou,             ......  2,H;J2.23 

Keul  estate.           .......  7.000.00 

Mtichiuery,            .......  7. 814.74 

Accounts  receivable,         ......  341). 30 

Amouuts  receivable  on  roll,       .....  388.1)4 

Supplies,                .......  147.04 

Expense,                .            .            .                        .            .            .  1/50.  .00 

Total.           .......  *41 .827.81 

Bonded  debt,        .......  $28,000.00 

Floating  debts,     .......  10,lo<).4G 

Amount  drawn  from  funds  other  than  electric  light,           .  917.02 

Electric  light  fund  overdrawn,              ....  C03.52 

Interest  on  bonds,            ......  327.00 

Assets  in  excess  of  liabilities.     .....  1,820.81 

Total,  .......         841,827.81 

"  This  shows  that  our  practical  assets  in  the  unpaid  for  light  plant 
amount  to  onlj-  $1,820.81.  The  above  statement  does  not  show,  however, 
where  the  shortage  in  the  supply  account  went  to. 

"  There  are  shortages  amounting  to  thousands  of  dollars.  In  other 
words,  that  is  all  we  have  to  show  for  all  the  good  money  which  we  have 
put  into  the  plant." 

aUITMAN,  Ga.,  plaut,  $16,000;  coal,  81.00  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  82,200;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  8^)00;  depreciation,  8800; 
taxes  and  insurance,  81t50;  sinking  fund  to  paj-  bonds,  8.000  ;  making 
84,670,  less  income,  82,200,  and  we  have  82,420,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0484  per  hour,  and  furnishing  413  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

QUAKERTOWN,  Pa.,  plant,  822,000;  coal,  82.10  per  ton;  oper- 
ating expenses,  84,01)3  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  8880  :  depreciation. 
81,100;  taxes  and  insurance,  8220;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  8750; 
making  87.043,  less  income,  and  we  have  83,243,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  3,000  hours,  costing  .025  per  hour,  and  furnishing  470  caudle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

ROCK  FALLS,  111.,  plant,  810,000;  operating  expenses,  84,000; 
interest  at  four  i)er  cent,  8400;  depreciation,  8500  ;  taxes  and  insurance. 
iflOO  ;  sinking  fund  to  paj-  bonds,  8500  ;  making  .85,500.  less  income, 
83,000,  and  we  have  82,500,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,000  hours, 
costing  .0416  per  hour,  and  furnishing  480  candle  power  per  hour  for  one 
cent. 

The  mayor  says : 

It  is  shown  by  the  foregoing  figures  that  the  plant  ran  behind. 
Where  does  this  deficiency  belong  ?  The  tax  paj'er  expects  to  pay  the 
bonded  indebtedness  incurred  by  the  light  plant.      He  is  willing  to  pay 


111 


all  expenses  due  to  running  and  maintaining  the  arc  service,  but  he 
rightly  objects  when  asked  to  make  up  a  deficiency  for  which  he  may  not 
be  responsible. 

The  street  light  should  be  supported  by  and  for  the  benefit  of  the 
general  tax  payer,  who  rightly  asks  that  he  shall  not  be  taxed  for  more 
than  the  fair  maintainauce  of  this  service. 

Money  j^aid  in  b.i/  general  taxation  has  been  absorbed  by  the 
expense  of  the  incandescent  lights.  It  is  certainly  not  justice  to  tax 
those  who  do  not  use  incandescent  lights  for  the  benefit  of  those  who  do. 

ROCHELLE,  111.,  plant,  $11,000;  coal,  $3.15  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  $4,000;  interestat  five  per  cent,  $550  ;  depreciation,  $550  ;  taxes 
and  insurance,  $700 ;  making  |5,200,  less  income,  $3,000,  and  we  have 
$2,200,  as  cost  of  street  lights  ourned  1,200  hours,  costing  .0416  per  hour, 
and  furnishing  480  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

READING,  Mass.,  plant,  174,400;  have  1,200  candle  power  lamps, 
and  the  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Commissioners  state  they  cost  $89.65  per 
year,  Imrued  2,532  hours,  costing  .0354  per  hour,  and  furnishing  338 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

RENSSELAER,  Ind.,  plant,  $8,000;  coal,  $1.95  per  ton;  operat- 
ing expenses,  •'$6,000  ;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $480;  depreciation,  $400  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $80  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  mortgage,  $700  ;  making 
$7,660,  less  income,  $5,000,  and  we  have  ■$2,6()0,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0443  per  hour,  and  furnishing  270  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

RTJSHVILLE,  Ind.,  burned  the  lights  2,190  hours,  costing  .0750 
per  hour,  and  furnishing  266  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

ST.  CHARLES,  111.,  light  the  streets  with  incandescents,  and 
after  deducting  all  income,  lights  cost  $15.42  per  lamp  per  year. 

ST.  CLAIR,  Pa.,  plant,  $26,500  ;  coal,  !|1.00  per  ton;  operatingex- 
penses,  $4,437.40  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $1,060  ;  depreciation,  :if  1,325  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $265  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $1,325  ;  making 
$8,412.40,  less  income,  $6,321,  and  we  have  $2,091.40,  cost  of  strept 
lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0365  per  hour,  and  furnishing  563 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

SOUTH  BOSTON,  Va.,  plant,  $2,000;  operating  expenses,  $812.55; 
interest  at  six  per  cent,  $120;  depreciation,  $100;  taxes  and  insurance, 
$20;  making  $1,052.55,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  1,500  hours,  costing 
.0467  per  hour,  and  furnishing  256  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

SALEM,  Va.,  plant,  $19,000  ;  coal,  81  cents  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $2,625  ;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $1,140  ;  depreciation,  $950;  taxes 
and    insurance,   $190;    making  $4,905,  less  income,  $1,800,  and  we  have 

112 


$3,105,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  1,500  hours,  costing  ,0370  per  hour, 
and  furnishing  319  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

ST.  PETER,  Minn.,  plant,  $20,000;  coal,  $3.15  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  .*4,500  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $1,000  ;  depreciation,  SI, 000; 
taxes  and  insurance.  $200 ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds.  $500 ;  making 
$7,200.  less  income,  $8,780,  and  we  have  $3,420,  as  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .0476  per  hour,  and  furnishing  420  caudle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

SHERMAN.  Texas,  plant,  $21,00b;  coal,  $3.50  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $5,000;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $1,2C0  ;  depreciation,  $1,050  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $210;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  .$500;  making 
$8,020,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  4,000  hours,  costing  .0211  per  hour, 
and  furnishing  948  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

SPRINGVILLE,  N.  Y.,  plant,  $25,500  ;  water  power;  operating 
expenses,  $1,000;  interest  at  three  percent,  $705;  depreciation,  $1,275  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $255  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  .tl.OOO  ;  making 
$4,295.  less  income,  $1,500,  and  we  have  $2,795,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  4,000  hours,  costing  .0155  per  hour,  and  furnishing  1,290  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

STUART,  la,,  plant,  $11,400;  coal,  $1.50  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  *G,277.77  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $570  ;  depreciation,  $570  ; 
taxes  and  water  rent,  $114  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $570  ;  making 
$8, 101.77,  less  income,  $4,880.38,  and  we  have  $3,221.39,  cost  of  street 
lights  being  $18.94  per  j-ear  per  lamp  for  IG  candle  power  incandescent. 

SHELBY,  Ohio,  plant,  $38,000;  coal,  $1.85  per  ton;  operating  ex- 
penses, .$8,941.77  ;  interest  at  six  per  cent.  $2,280  ;  depreciation,  >!l,900  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $380;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  .$750:  total, 
$14,251.77,  less  income,  $8,763.97,  and  we  have  .«5, 487.80,  as  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0409  per  hour,  and  furnishing  48S 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

STATESVILLE,  N.  C,  plant.  $9.0U0  ;  wood,  $1.50  per  cord  ;  op- 
erating expenses,  .$1,500;  interest  at  five  percent,  S450  ;  depreciation, 
$450  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  $90  ;  sinking  fund  to  jmy  bonds,  .$400  ;  mak- 
ing $2,890,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0466  per 
hoiir  and  furnishing  257  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

SANTA  CRUZ,  Cal.,  plant.  $16,500;  operating  expenses.  $7,250 ; 
interest  at  six  per  cent,  $990  ;  depreciation,  .$825  ;  taxes  and  insurance, 
$165;  making  $9,230,  cost, of  street  lights  burned  1,500  hours,  costing 
.0732  per  hour,  and  furnishing  273  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

SPRINGFIELD,  111.  The  debt  of  the  city  had  already  reached 
the  limit  allowed  b}'  law,  therefore,  they  could  not  adopt  municipal 
ownership. 

113 
(8) 


Parties  wishing  to  sell  a  plant,  and  to  evade  this  law,  proposed 
installing  a  plant,  and  the  city  to  levy  a  tax  amounting  to  $113.33  per 
lamp  per  year,  and,  when  the  surplus  over  cost  of  lights  amounted  to  the 
cost  of  plant,  they  would  turn  it  over  to  the  city.  It  was  stated  that  the 
cost  of  the  plant  would  be  $60,000. 

This  scheme  was  inaugurated  in  1895,  and  the  tax  payers  have  paid 
$113.33  per  lamp  per  year,  making  a  total  of  $176,258.80.  When  we 
add  depreciation  at  five  per  cent  for  the  five  years,  making  $29,599.30, 
and  interest,  $21,000,  clerk  hire  charged  to  the  city,  $3,000,  taxes  lost, 
$2,500,  insurance  charged  to  the. city,  $2,300,  and  $46,507.38  still  due, 
and  it  makes  a  total  of  $281,165.48,  as  cost  of  plant  and  operating,  on  an 
average,  310  arc  lamps  for  five  years,  deducting  cost  of  plant,  and  lights 
cost  $138.48  per  lamp  per  year. 

In  the  above  calculation  attorneys'  fees,  stationery  and  printing,  and 
advertising  charged  to  the  city  are  not  included. 

They  report  plainly  that  city  expended,  or  assumed,  this  amount. 
If  not  for  purchase  of  plant,  must  have  been  for  running  the  lights. 

In  April.  1900,  F.  W.  Tracy  notified  the  aldermen  that  "  All  was  in 
readiness  for  the  transfer  of  the  plant  to  the  city,  and  that  there  was  still 
due  on  the  same  $46,507.38." 

A  deed,  drafted  by  the  same  party,  was  presented,  which  specified 
that  only  $20,000  had  been  received  in  payment  for  the  site  of  the  plant 
and  the  appliances.  The  aldermen  accepted  of  the  deed,  and  authorized 
the  payment  of  the  $46,507.38.  One  alderman  said,  "  There  is  no  way  to 
divide  the  plant.  It  is  all  one  plant.  The  same  boilers  and  same  steam 
operate  both  street  lights  and  private  lights."  What  are  the  city 
buying  ? 

That  is,  the  city  have  paid  $281,165.48,  and  get,  in  return,  a  second 
hand  plant,  which  is  connected  with,  and  cannot  be  separated  from,  the 
commercial  plant,  and  the  use  of  310  arc  lights  for  five  years. 

The  reason  given  to  the  public  for  not  turning  over  the  commercial 
part  of  the  plant  was  because  the  state  law  prohibited  city  operating 
same,  but  that  it  will  be  turned  over  if  the  city  can  induce  the  legislature 
to  pass  a  bill  authorizing  them  to  use  it  and  do  a  commercial  business. 

This  is  the  public  statement  made,  while  privately  they  state  that 
the  company  do  not  wish  such  a  bill  passed,  on  the  grounds  of  public 
policy.  That  the  company  prefer  to  have  cities  forbidden  to  undertake 
such  business,  and  that  thej^  are  satisfied  with  the  present  plan,  and  are 
opposed  to  any  change. 

They  claim  that  there  has  only  $20,000  been  paid  upon  the  plant,  and 
that  there  is  $46,507.38  still  due.  This  would  make  the  cost  of  the 
municipal  part  of  plant,  by  their  figures,  $66,507.38,  deducting  this  from 
total  and  we  have  a  balance  of  $214,658.10. 

As  there  might  arise,  under  these  conditions,  questions  which  would 
be  difficult  answering,  the  following  project  was  inaugurated  and  carried 
through. 

In  June,  1900,  the  city  council,  by  a  vot(i,  accepted  a  proposition 

114 


from  the  Capital  City  Electric  Company  to  buy  the  commercial  i)laut  for 
$20,000,  and  lease  the  municipal  plant  for  five  years. 

A  special  committee,  appointed  by  the  ma3-or  to  investigate  and 
ascertain  the  cost  of  the  electric  plant,  reported  that  the  cost  of  the 
coniraercial  plant  was  !i!.'jl,0r)4.5o,  and  the  city  sold  it  for  820,000.  making 
a  net  loss  of  *31,054..'J5  for  the  tax  paj'ers  upon  the  commercial  plant.  In 
addition  to  this,  the  city  agrees  to  forfeit  $10,000  as  damages,  if  they  fail 
to  complj'  with  the  conditions  of  the  lease. 

After  all  the  outlay  and  loss  already  sustained,  the  city  agree  to 
furnish,  at  their  own  expense,  an  electric  plant  complete,  loose  the 
taxes,  the  interest  on  the  investment,  and  the  depreciation  upon  the 
entire  plant  and  repairs  of  same,  furnish  water  free,  and  then,  in 
addition,  pay  $iiO  jier  lamp  j^er  year,  payable  on  the  first  day  of  each 
mouth,  and,  if  not  paid  at  that  time,  the  city  to  pay  seven  per  cent 
interest. 

The  lease  also  requires  the  city  to  furnish  a  station  building,  boilers, 
engines,  pumps,  and  apparatus  for  running  the  commercial  light 
machinery'  without  charge  to  the  compauj"-  operating  same,  while  the 
entire  income  from  the  commercial  plant  goes  to  the  company. 

Here  we  have  the  history  and  working  of  a  plan  which  was  to  give 
the  tax  pa3'er8  a  plant  free. 

The  same  plan  was  to  be  adopted  at  Des  Moines,  Iowa,  b}-  the  same 
parties,  who  desired  to  sell  another  plant,  but  the  supreme  court  of  that 
state  put  a  quietus  upon  the  business,  and  the  plan  had  to  be  abandoned. 

SOMERVILLE,  Tenn.,  plant,  $5,000;  coal,  $2. Go  per  ton;  oper- 
ating  expenpes,  $1,800;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $250;  depreciation, 
$250  ;  taxes  aud  insurance,  $50  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $250  ;  making 
$2,000,  less  income,  $1,080,  and  we  have  $020,  as  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .0438  per  hour,  aud  furnishing  456  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

ST.  CHARLES,  Mo.,  plant,  $17,000  :  coal,  $1.85  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $4,700;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $850;  dei)reciation,  $850; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $170  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $750  ;  making  $7,320, 
cofct  of  street  lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0303  per  hour,  and 
furnishing  508  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

SOUTH  NORWALK,  Conn.,  plant,  $42,500;  operating  expenses, 
i;7.7!)4.74;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $1,700  ;  depreciation,  $2,125  ;  taxes, 
$425  ;  sinking  fund  to  paj-  bonds,  $2,125  :  making  $14,l()l).74,  lessincom^ 
from  commerciariights  and  power,  $5,304.78,  and  we  have  $8,804.90,  cost 
of  98  1,400-candle  power  street  lights,  being  $90.45  per  year,  burned 
only  1,900  hours,  at  an  expense  of  .0470  per  hour,  and  furnishing  294 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

On  the  10th  page  of  their  1897  report  they  give  running  expenses 
and  salaries  at  $3,000.28  ;  and  on  the  Uth  page  of  1899  report,  their  run- 
ning expenses  and  salaries  are  $7,480.30,  more  than  double,  while  the 

115 


number  of  street  lights  in  1899  were  two  less  than  they  were  in  1897. 
Since  the  above  report  .was  made,  the  price  of  coal  has  advanced  very 
heavily,  and  the  general  superintendent  of  the  plant  stated  to  a  news- 
paper reporter  "  that  the  increase  in  the  price  of  coal  has  taken  away  all 
the  profits  during  the  last  few  months  from  the  operation  of  the  electric 
lighting  plant  in  South  Norwalk.  This,  of  course,  will  increase  their 
expenses,  and  they  must  meet  the  contingencies  that  arite  in  all  business 
enterprises,  while  if  they  had  a  contract  with  a  private  company,  the  loss 
occasioned  in  this  way  would  have  been  borne  by  the  private  companj'- 
and  not  by  the  tax  payers. 

STAUNTON,  111.,  plant,  f  18, 000;  coal,  58  cents  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $2,620  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $940  ;  depreciation,  $940  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $100  ;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $350  ;  making  $4,950, 
less  income,  $2,500,  and  we  have  $2,450,  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
2.000  hours,  costing  .034  per  hour,  and  furnishing  588  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

SMYRNA,  Del.,  plant,  $15,000;  coal,  $2.35  per  ton;  operating  ex- 
penses, $2,745  ;  interest  at  five  percent,  $750  ;  depreciation,  $750  ;  taxes 
and  insurance,  $150  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $750  ;  making  $5,145, 
less  income,  $3,000,  and  we  have  $2,145,  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
2,300  hours,  costing  .042  per  hour,  and  furnishing  28iJ  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

SHELBY,  Mich.,  plant,  $6,500;  coal,  $2.10  per  ton;  operating  ex- 
penses, $1,000  ;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $390  ;  depreciation,  $325  ;  taxes 
and  insurance,  $65;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $325  ;  making  $2,105, 
less  income,  $1,200,  and  we  have  $905,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  1,500 
hours,  costing  ,0333  per  hour,  and  furnishing  360  candle  power  per  hour 
for  one  cent. 

SHARPSBURG,  JPenn.  The  superintendent  reports  that  the 
water  works  and  electric  lights  are  all  run  as  one  plant,  and  no  separate 
accounts  kept,  but,  as  near  as  they  can  tell,  the  lights  cost,  not  includ- 
ing interest,  depreciation  or  taxes,  about  $60  per  year.  He  also  states 
that  they  can  dviplicate  their  plant  for  one-half  what  they  paid  for  it. 

SHICKSHINNY,  Pa.,  plant,  $8,000;  coal,  85  cents  per  ton  ;  operat- 
ing expenses,  $1,800  ;  interest  atfive  percent,  $400  ;  depreciation,  $400; 
taxes  and  insiirance,  $50;  sinking  fund  for  bonds,  $400;  making  $3,050, 
less  income,  $1,200,  and  we  have  -If  1,850,  as  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
2,200  hours,  costing  .035  per  hour,  and  furnishing  571  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

SANTA  CLARA,  Cal.,  plant,  $9,000;  wood,  $2.30  per  cord ;  oper- 
atiLg  expenses,  $1,720;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $540  ;  depreciation,  $450 ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $90  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $300  ;  making 
$3,100,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  1,200  hours,  costing  .0549  per  hour, 
and  furnishing  364  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

116 


ST.  JOSEPH,  Mo.,  plant.  sftOO.OOO  ;  coal,  $1.20  per  tou  ;  operntiu? 
expenses,  !J22,000  ;  interest  at  tive  per  cent,  .'!<4,.'JU0;  depreciation,  .*4.500 ; 
taxes  aud  insurance,  fSWO  ;  making  $3I,UO0,  cost  of  street  lights  "burned 
2,200  hours,  costinsr  .030  per  hour,  and  furnishing  512  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

SWANTON,  Vt.,  plant,  !5'4 1,476. 04  ;  water  power:  operating 
expen.ses.  .•t^J.7S().G4  ;  interest  at  tive  per  cent,  !*!2,073.H0  ;  depreciation, 
$2,073.80  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  debt,  .•?2,073.M0  ;  making  *!),008.04,  less  all 
income,  $4,647.52,  and  we  have  $4,360.52,  cost  of  street  lights  burned 
3,000  hours,  costing  .058  per  hour,  and  furnishing  344  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

Their  operating  expenses  have  increased  every  year.  In  1895  they 
were  $1,899.21,  in  1896  were  $2,375.62.  in  1897  were  $2,614.94,  while  in 
1899  they  were  $2,786.64. 

These  expenses  are  taken  as  given  by  the  officials  in  their  reports  to 
the  tux  payers. 

The  street  lights  in  1895  cost  $95.17,  in  1896,  $115.79,  in  1897  they 
cost  $144.07,  while  in  1899,  as  shown  by  the  village's  own  report,  cost 
$174.42  per  Jampper  year.  On  the  36th  page  of  their  report  we  find  the 
following  statement  :  "  Your  trustees  would  rei>ort  that,  b}-  the  bursting 
of  a  large  imlley,  one  of  our  dynamos  was  badly  injured,  causing  great 
inconvenience  to  those  using  the  lights,  and  an  exi>eu8e  of  about  $250  to  • 
the  village,  and  making  it  necessary  for  us  to  purchase  a  new  dynamo, 
the  expense  of  which  was  $3,000." 

In  addition  to  this  amount,  on  page  30  are  expenses,  for  setting  this 
dynamo,  of  $278.79,  and  in  trustees'  account  is  an  item  of  $64.65  express 
on  armatures. 

These  items  are  reported  as  an  addition  to  the  plant,  while  they 
should  go  to  repairs,  as  the  new  dynamo  onlj'  takes  the  place  of  one 
destroj-ed. 

This  dj-namo  has  evidently  not  been  paid  for.  as  it  does  not  appear 
in  any  of  their  accounts. 

SALEM,  111.,  plant,  $12,000:  coal,  $1.50  per  ton  ;  operating  expenses, 
$2,400;  interest  at  tive  per  cent,  $600;  depreciation,  $600:  taxes  and 
insurance,  $120  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $400  ;  making  $4,120,  less 
income,  $2,000,  and  we  have  $2,120,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  1.500 
hours,  costing  .0293  per  hour,  aud  furnishing  682  candle  power  per  hour 
for  one  cent. 

TOLEDO,  Ohio.  One  of  the  most  striking  object  lessons  on  muni- 
cipal ownership  in  this  country  is  at  Toledo,  Ohio.  In  1890  they  installed 
a  gas  plant,  and  the  history  of  this  business  is  a  fair  sample  of  hundreds 
of  other  cities.  The  testimony  of  Manager  Herton  shows  that  the  city 
had  spent  $1,250,000  in  installing  a  municipal  gas  plant,  and  all  of  the 
l)onds  issued  for  this  plant  are  still  unpaid.  Ex-inspector  Meissner,  who 
was  also  president  of  the  board  of  aldermen,  testitied  as  follows  : 

117 


' '  That  over  one-half  of  the  plant  was  not  in  the  proper  condition  to 
operate,  owing  to  defective  workmanship,  and  incompetent  help,  at  the 
time  the  pipes  were  laid.  When  the  pipe  liners  laid  the  pipe  through 
the  city  fields  they  did  it  without  the  aid  of  a  topographical  map  of  the 
country.  They  went  across  streams  and  ravines  without  making  drips, 
and  when  the  line  became  defective  there  were  no  drips  to  strengthen  it. 
In  the  mean  time,  the  engineer  had  been  discharged,  and  new  ones 
hired,  who  knew  nothing  of  the  work  of  their  predecessors,  as  no  maps 
were  made.  Many  'obstructions  were  left  in  the  pipe  by  the  employes. 
When  they  stopped  work  at  night  they  would  leave  their  tools  in  the 
line,  and  forget  all  about  them  in  the  morning.  The  work  would  be 
continued  with  the  tools  in  the  line.  One-third  of  the  labor  on  this 
project  was  thrown  away,  I  remember  that  four  barrels  of  water  were 
taken  from  a  four  inch  line.  This  was  due  to  incompetent  labor  and 
leaky  joints.  I  saw  this,  but  had  no  authority  to  correct  it.  I  know  of 
leases  made  by  the  city  in  territory  that  the  Northwestern  would  not 
touch.  The  city  took  the  leases,  and  if  a  gasser  was  struck  the  owner 
was  paid  for  it  at  the  rate  of  a  million  feet.  That  was  when  wells  were 
measured  by  the  million  ;  now  a  700,00()-foot  well  is  a  hummer. 

"If  an  oiler  was  struck,  the  city  gave  it  up,  and  had  no  oil  rights  ; 
the  owner  paid  the  expense  of  drilling  the  well  and  let  it  go  at  that.  The 
way  in  which  the  well  would  be  worked,  when  the  city  was  to  buy,  was 
something  after  this  manner  :  They  would  cap  the  well  until  it  showed 
a  pressure  of  750  pounds  to  the  square  inch,  which  would  be  a  two  or 
three  million  foot  well.  It  would  be  measured,  and  the  city  would  pay 
for  it  at  that  rate.  After  two  weeks  it  would  not  be  good  for  700  cubic 
feet,  and  sometimes  the  wells  would  peter  out  in  three  or  four  days. 
Many  people  drilled  wells  and  the  city  bought  them,  and  the  drillers  did 
not  care  whether  the  wells  were  any  good  or  not,  so  long  as  they  got 
their  pay.  The  trustees  hired  incompetent  persons  in  important 
positions.  A  man  was  employed  to  secvire  leases,  and  go  from  house  to 
house  to  canvass  for  subscribers.  Very  soon  he  bobbed  up  as  an  oil  con- 
tractor, and  is  now  working  in  the  field  for  the  city.  Where  did  he  get  his 
capital  ?  Every  month  the  reports  of  the  trustees  show  so  much  paid  to 
him  for  drilling  wells.  That  is  where  the  leaks  in  the  department  come 
in. 

"  There  is  a  man  in  the  city's  employ  now,  and  is  drawing  a  salary  of 
over  $2,000,  who  was  employed  at  one  time  by  R.  W.  Smith  &  Company. 
He  told  me  that  Smith  used  to  figure  on  laying  pipe  for  the  city,  and 
would  make  specifications  at  about  20  per  cent  profit  above  estimated 
cost  of  materials  and  labor,  and  would  then  add  20  per  cent  for  contin- 
gencies. The  trustees  would  make  contracts  at  these  prices,  and  the 
lines  would  be  laid,  and  25  per  cent  of  the  material  was  never  used. 
The  city  hired  a  man  to  go  from  house  to  house  and  induce  subscribers 
to  change  from  the  Northwestern  to  the  city  line  ;  if  they  did  not  do  it 
they  were  branded  as  not  patriotic.  I  know  of  cases  where  the  changes 
in  plumbing  made  necessary  by  the  change  were  paid  by  the  city,  and 
the  subscriber  has  not  paid  enough  revenue  to  make  good  the  plumber's 

118      . 


bills."  This  is  the  way  business  is  maDaged  under  municipal  ownership, 
and  then  the  claim  is  made  that,  with  such  management,  thej'  can  furnish 
lights  cheaper  than  private  companies. 

City  Accountant  Whittlesley  prepared  a  statement  showing  that  the 
operating  expenses  for  four  years  htwe  exceeded  the  total  income  by 
$24,328.50.  When  it  became  evident  that  municipal  ownership  was  a 
failure,  the  maj'or  conceived  the  plan  of  leasing  the  works  to  his  syndi- 
cate. Under  this  plan  the  mayor  was  to  turn  over  to  the  syndicate  the 
entire  property  of  the  municipal  plant,  the  syndicate  were  to  erect  a  plant 
for  the  manufacture  of  gas,  they  having  the  right  to  sell  any  and  all  of 
said  city  plant,  as  they  might  liud  necessary  or  desirable.  The  entire 
proceeds  from  the  sale  of  gas.  and  all  moneys,  to  be  paid  to  this  sj-ndi- 
cate,  and  expended  by  them  as  they  thought  proper.  The  sj'ndicate 
should  have  the  right  to  conduct  the  business  as  they  pleased,  expend 
any  amount  of  monej'  they  thought  proper  in  installing  the  plant,  pay 
whatever  exorbitant  salaries  they  pleased,  employ  any  number  of  men 
in  the  business ;  in  fact,  have  the  most  complete  monopoly  of  the 
business  until  the  profits  amounted  to  enough  to  pay  back  to  them  all  of 
the  principal  they  had  invested,  with  live  per  cent  semi-annual  interest 
and  all  expenses  of  operation.  That  is,  Ma3'or  Jones  patriotic  83-nfbcate 
would  run  the  business  until  the  plant  was  practically  worn  out  ;  then 
the  city  could  have  it  by  paying  them  for  the  entire  outlay  and  expenses, 
with  five  per  cent  interest  for  the  full  time.  The  city  must  pay  what 
the  entire  business  cost  when  new,  and  take  an  old  worn  out  affair. 

The  aldermen  did  not  appreciate  this  generous  offer,  and  rejected  it. 
Then  it  was  decided  to  sell  the  plant  outright.  The  mayor  claimed  that 
the  plant,  which  had  cost  si. 250, 000,  was  now  worth  8500.000,  but  when 
the  bids  were  opened  it  was  found  that  the  Jones  syndicate  had  offered 
$300,000  for  it.  It  was  stated  that  the  object  of  this  syndicate  was  to 
protect  the  interest  of  the  tax  payers.  That  is,  the  propert}'  that  cost 
$1,250,000,  and  which  it  was  claimed  was  now  worth  8500,000,  they  would 
buy  for  8300,000,  so  as  to  protect  the  city's  interest.  If  the  property 
was  worth  8500,000,  why  did  not  this  S3'ndicate,  if  they  wish  to  protect 
the  city,  bid  that  amount,  instead  of  8300,000  ?  The  maj'or  saj's  you 
cannot  make  a  contract  but  some  lawyer  could  drive  through  it  with  a 
horse  and  wagon.  If  this  is  the  case,  would  not  the  contract  referred  to 
above,  made  and  offered  to  the  city  by  this  syndicate  for  leasing  the 
plant,  be  in  the  same  condition,  and  would  it  not  be  the  syndicate's 
lawyer  who  would  drive  the  horse  and  wagon  ?  The  plant  cost  $1,250,000  ; 
add  interest  and  taxes  lost,  together  with  the  loss  in  operating  it,  during 
the  past  four  years,  of  824,328.50,  and  we  have  over  two  millions,  not 
including  the  loss  in  operating  previous  to  1805.  After  only  ten  years' 
use,  the  highest  bid  they  could  get  for  this  property  was  8300,000,  making 
a  net  loss  to  the  tax  payers  of  8 1, TOO, 000  in  ten  j-ears. 

After  such  an  experience  and  loss  as  this,  with  the  fraud  and  swind- 
ling disclosed  in  the  testimony  of  the  president  of  the  board,  the  gas 
trustees,  composed  of  three  men,  while  the  council  had  the  business  in 
hand  and  were  considering  what  action  better  be  taken  to  protect  th^ 

119 


city,  inaugurated  and  secretly  carried  through  at  a  star  chamber  session 
a  contract  that,  under  the  circumstances,  has  no  parallel  in  this  country 
in  its  infringement  upon  the  rights  of  tax  payers.  If  this  contract  was 
for  the  best  interest  of  the  city,  why  was  it  not  made  public  and  the 
150,000  citizens  of  Toledo  allowed  an  opportunity  to  examine  and  discuss 
it  ?  Instead  of  this  it  was  rushed  through  secretly  for  the  very  purpose 
of  defeating  any  action  or  examination  on  the  part  of  tax  payers. 

Here  we  have  an  example  of  what  can  and  will  be  done  by  advocates 
of  municipal  ownership  when  they  are  given  the  control  of  public  busi- 
ness. The  gas  trustees  evidently  adopted  the  same  system  as  was  used 
by  the  gas  ring  in  Philadelphia,  regardless  of  the  public's  rights.  This 
syndicate,  by  this  contract,  are  to  furnish  fuel  gas  of  500  heat  unites  at 
their  station,  to  be  measured  there  with  a  meter.  It  is  then  to  be  con- 
veyed into  the  pipes  belonging  to  the  city,  which  not  only  the  mayor, 
but  other  prominent  citizens  have  testified  are  of  no  value,  and  that  one- 
half  of  them  are  in  such  a  condition  that  the  gas  flows  into  the  ground 
and  streams  in  such  quantities  that  it  causes  bubbles  to  be  blown  in  the 
water.  This  loss  must  be  borne  by  the  city.  They  must  also  make  all 
repairs,  pay  for  all  piping,  light  and  extinguish  all  lamps  ;  in  fact,  as- 
sume the  entire  expense  of  the  business  except  manufacturing  the  gas 
at  the  station.  Not  only  that,  but  they  bind  the  city  to  furnish  custom- 
ers for  this  syndicate.  The  syndicate  have  about  as  fat  a  job  as  could  be 
desired,  and  this  contract  is  for  ten  years,  thus  giving  them  an  absolute 
monopoly  for  that  time.  Here  is  a  star-chamber  contract  that  the  syn- 
dicate's lawyer,  if  he  desires,  can  drive  a  four-horse  team  through  with- 
out friction. 

The  average  leakage  in  gas  pipes,  when  they  are  in  good  condition, 
is  about  twelve  per  cent,  and  the  heavier  the  pressure  at  the  works  the 
more  leakage.  With  pipes  in  such  condition  as  shown  at  Toledo,  the 
loss  must  exceed  fifty  per  cent. 

It  is  for  the  interest  of  the  syndicate  to  carry  as  high  a  pressure  as 
possible,  because  they  are  paid  for  every  thoixsand  feet  that  the  meter 
registers  at  their  station,  and  meters  are  never  tired. 

BY   THE   HON.    GXJY   G.    MA  J  OK,    MAYOR. 

Our  city  has  had  a  rather  dear  experience  trying  to  furnish  our  citi- 
zens gas. 

The  state  legislature,  some  six  years  ago,  passed  an  enabling  act, 
authorizing  a  bond  issue  of  $750,000,  same  to  be  used  for  gas  purposes. 
Before  the  bonds  were  issued  or  the  money  expended,  the  proposition 
was  submitted  to  a  vote  of  the  people— sixty-three  per  cent  favored  the 
expenditure.  The  entire  amoaut  was  expended,  then  certificates  of  in- 
debtedness were  issued  for  $600,000,  afterward  unpaid  bills  amounting 
to  about  $3fi0,000,  that  were  paid  by  general  refunding  twenty-five-year 
four  per  cent  bonds.  The  gas  line  has  not  paid  interest  or  principal, 
and  is  to-day  losing  about  $2,500  per  month. 

It  is  my  opinion  that  the  plant  would  not  sell  for  $150,000  to-day,  as 

120 


it  is  built  of  wrought  irou,  and  the  life  of  wrought  iron  pipe  in  the  ground 
is  not  over  six  or  eight  3'ear8. 

Our  city  made  au  experiment  similar  to  this  in  1872,  built  a  S3'8tem 
of  water  works  that  cost  .*1, 000,000,  issued  eight  per  cent  bonds.  These 
bonds  were  refunded  in  181)3  and  1894  at  four  and  one-half  and  live  per 
cent. 

During  the  twenty  years  the  water  works  department  did  not  pay  a 
dollar  of  its  principal  or  interest. 

Persouall}',  under  our  form  of  government,  I  do  not  believe  munic- 
ipalities should  engage  in  business,  the  above  being  examples  why  they 
should  not, 

PUBLIC  OWNERSHIP  VIVISECTED. 

BY    EDWARD    WISNER. 

Toledo  is  a  city  of  nearly  150,000  people,  the  equal  in  intelligence 
and  enterprise  of  an3'  similar  community'  in  the  world  It  is  a  city  of 
beautiful  homes  and  thriving  industry,  the  second  railway  center  in  the 
world,  and  situated  to  comjnand  a  large  share  of  the  commerce  of  the 
unsalted  seas.  In  no  city  in  this  country  are  the  masses  better  clothed, 
better  fed  and  better  housed. 

Toledo  has  had  some  experiences  in  owning  public  utilities,  and  the 
balance  sheet  is  interesting  reading  at  this  time. 

Toledo  built  what  is  known  as  the  Woodville  railroad. 

It  cost  .*448,000.  The  city  sold  it  to  the  Penusjivauia  Railroad  Com- 
pany for,*225,000,  or  $223,000  less  than  it  cost.  The  city  borrowed  s432. 000 
of  the  original  cost  and  gave  her  bonds  bearing  7  o-lO  per  cent,  jmyable 
in  thirtj'  years.  The  bonds  will  become  due  next  year.  When  due  the 
city  will  have  paid  1*040,080  in  interest,  and  principal  will  have  to  be  car- 
ried along  until  the  present  generation  shall  have  bequeathed  to  pos- 
terity l)oth  the  debt  and  municipal  problems. 

Toledo  owns  a  natural  gas  outtit,  consisting  of  pipe  line,  gas 
leases,  etc. 

The  city  borrowed  fl, .000, 000  to  go  into  the  gas  business.  This  en- 
terprise has  paid  .'f!lU0,0UO  gross  to  the  citj',  but  not  one  cent  of  interest, 
which  is  running  at  the  rate  of  $67.;'500  per  annum.  Hy  the  time  the  nat- 
ural gas  bonds  are  due  the  citj'  will  have  paid  over  a  half  million  dollars 
in  interest  in  excess  of  the  $100,000  received,  and  will  leave  its  tax 
payers  burdened  with  the  original  debt  of  .f  1,500,000. 

The  value  of  the  natural  gas  plant  is  the  subject  of  much  discussion 
at  the  present  time.  The  citj'  has  recently  refused  a  cash  offer  of 
$250,000  for  it,  and  has  entered  into  a  contract  with  a  New  York  sj'udi- 
cate  for  the  manufacture  of  fuel  gas  to  supplement  the  natural  gas 
supply,  agreeing  to  pay  twenty  cents  per  thousand  up  to  2,000,000  cubic 
feet  per  day  ;  when  the  gas  taken  exceeds  that  amount  the  i)rice  is  to  be 
18  cents.  The  city  reserves  the  right  to  buy  the  supplementary  gas  plant 
to  be  erected  by  the  syndicate  at  any  time  after  two  3'ears.  capitalized  on 
a  five  per  cent  net  earning  basis,   but  not  to  exceed  $250,000  for  a  plant 

121 


capable  of  making  3,000,000  feet  of  gas  per  clay.  In  any  event  the  nat- 
ural gas  experiment  has  been  a  costly  one. 

It  is  only  fair  to  state  that  the  advocates  of  municipal  ownership  ex- 
cuse this  failure  on  the  ground  that  the  natural  gas  supply  became  ex- 
hausted or  nearly  so— a  disaster  which  no  foresight  could  provide  against. 
It  should  also  be  stated  that  a  competitor  under  private  ownership,  oc- 
cupying the  same  field  has  made  the  business  profitable  and  is  still  pay- 
ing dividends,  thus  demonstrating  the  superiority  of  private  business 
management  over  public  management. 

It  is  a  well-known  fact,  and  one  which  will  hardly  be  disputed,  that 
what  is  done  by  the  government  now  is  done  wastefully,  and  it  is  possi- 
ble for  the  government  to  conduct  its  business  as  it  does  only  because 
through  its  taxing  form  it  commands  the  profits  of  all  the  productive  in- 
dustry of  the  country.  The  postoflfice  department,  which  is  so  often 
held  up  to  us  as  a  fine  example  of  government  business  ability  is  able  to 
run  only  because  it  has  the  United  States  treasury  back  of  it ;  as  a  busi- 
ness proposition  it  loses  directly  about  $40,000  per  day  every  daj'  in  the 
year — indirectly  it  undoubtedly  loses  as  much  more.  From  a  business 
standpoint  there  should  be  considered  interest  on  its  plant,  which  would 
swell  the  deficit  enormously.  There  should  be  charged  a  large  sum  an- 
nually for  depreciation,  repairs,  and  renewals  of  public  buildings  ;  at 
present  no  charge  is  made  to  the  post  office  department  for  janitor  ser- 
vice, heat  and  light  in  the  government  buildings,  these  expenses  being 
charged  to  the  treasury  department.  If  everything  were  charged  to  the 
postoffice  department,  which  is  a  legitimate  business  expense,  it  would 
undoubtedly  double  the  direct  deficit,  making  a  net  business  loss  of  ap- 
proximately $80,000  per  day — a  sum -which  for  the  year  equals  the  total 
average'wealth  of  nearly  30,000  American  citizens  ;  in  other  words,  the 
accumulated  savings  of  nearly  30,000  average  Americans  are  ^required 
every  year  to  make  good  the  losses  sustained  in  the  admittedly  best  con- 
ducted business  enterprise  in  which  the  government  is  engaged,  and  this 
amount  has  to  be  supplied  by  forced  contributions  frOm  the  people  of 
the  United  States,  who  know  enough  to  conduct  their  business  on  busi- 
ness principles.  It  must,  of  course,  be  admitted  that  the  benefits  of  the 
postal  system  are  ample  compensation  for  all  it  costs  the  people  in  the 
way  of  government  taxation  to  make  up  deficits.  But  while  the  people 
are  able  to  pay  the  losses  sustained  in  the  conduct  of  the  most  economi- 
cally run  department  of  its  government,  it  need  hardly  be  stated  that 
were  all  productive  industry  run  as  socialism  would  have  it,  by  the  gov- 
ernment and  all  of  it  run  as  the  best  of  it  now  is,  it  would  be  only  a 
short  run  to  bankruptcy  of  both  government  and  people.  It  is  a  fact  no- 
torious and  beyond  dispute  that  in  prett;y  much  all  the  ordinary  business 
transactions  the  government  gets  woefully  swindled.  It  pays  more  for 
any  piece  of  land  it  may  happen  to  want  than  individuals  or  corporations 
pay  under  similar  circumstances.  It  pays  $125  a  head  for  mules  and 
sells  them  a  few  months  afterwardior  $40  or  $50  per  head.  Any  wholesale 
grocer  who  would  do  business  on  the  same  plan  that  the  commissary  de- 
partment does  would  be  bankrupt  in  less  than  a  month.     The  possession 

122 


of  a  governmeut  coutraot  is  looked  upon  as  a  bonanza,  because  from  a 
business  standpoint  the  pay  for  propertj'  or  service  furnished  is  both 
sure  and  liberal.  Indeed,  so  universal  is  the  rule  that  it  will  be 
generally  admitted  without  either  argument  or  citation  of  example. 
Nobody  will  contend  that  municipal  government  fares  any  l)etter  from 
a  business  standpuint  than  does  the  general  government.  The  exhibit 
of  Toledo's  business  trausactiou,  made  in  another  place,  and  the  expe- 
rience of  every  large  city  between  the  two  oceans,  are  but  an  illustration 
of  how  municipalities  conduct  business. 

If  you  had  an  agent  conducting  a  part  of  j'our  business,  and  that 
agent  had  uniformly  been  expensive,  protiigate  and  corrupt,  -what  would 
you  think  of  a  proposition  to  turn  over  to  him  conduct  of  all  j'our 
business  aftairs,  and  to  place  your  fortunes  in  his  keeping.  Your  answer 
must  be  that  such  a  thing  would  be  preposterous.  But  that  is  exactly 
the  proposition  of  the  socialist.  The  state  and  municipality  necessarily 
have  to  conduct  some  l)usiness,  but  such  business  has  always  been  done 
with  an  expense  and  extravagance  which  would  mean  hopeless  bank- 
ruptcy were  all  business  so  conducted.  Common  sense  and  common 
prudence  require  a  positive  "no"  to  the  demands  of  the  socialist. 

BUSINESS   BY  POLITICIANS. 

Under  our  form  of  government  the  business  of  municipalities  and 
the  state  is  in  the  hands  of  the  politician.  Our  political  system  has  de- 
veloped the  boss.  New  York  city  furnishes  perhaps  the  best  example  of 
boss  rule,  because  New  York  has  the  greatest  municipal  business  to  con- 
duct, and  while  other  communities  are  not  bled  to  the  same  extent,  yet 
through  the  entire  country  may  be  found  a  similar  rule  of  the  political 
dictator,  each  community  in  proportion  to  the  business  and  revenues  to 
be  handled. 

Richard  Croker,  the  Tammany  chief,  who  i^  practically  king  of  our 
metropolis,  began  the  bussing  business  a  poor  man.  and  without  any  vis- 
ible means  of  making  even  a  decent  living,  he  has  become  immensely 
wealth}'.  It  is  a  fact  notorious  that  everj^  legitimate  business  which 
wants  fair  treatment  must  put  up  cold  cash,  a  part  of  which  finds  its  way 
to  the  boss'  pocket.  Illegitimate  business  which  wants  protection  and 
license  must  divide  the  spoils  with  Croker  :  every  man  who  wants  an  of- 
fice or  a  contract  with  the  city  must  "  see"  Croker  or  his  agents,  and 
make  his  peace  by  use  of  the  long  crreen. 

It  will  be  said  in  oflset  that  in  New  York  ali'airs  are  worse  managed 
than  in  other  places,  which  may  be  true,  but  everyl)od3'  who  knows  any- 
thing about  government  affairs  knows  that  everywhere  is  the  man  with 
a  "pull."  and  that  the  dilTerence  between  New  York  and  other  places  is 
a  matter  of  degree  only. 

Business  conduct  of  great  enterprise  by  the  state  is  nothing  new  and 
we  have  abundant  example  in  this  country. 

The  state  of  Michigan  built  the  Michigan  Central  railroad  from 
Detroit  to  Kalamazoo  at  a  cost  of  *3, 500, 000  and  sold  it  for  S'3. 000,000, 
and  that  is  one  of  the  brightest  examples  of  railroad  building  by  the 

123 


state  in  this  couutry.  Illinois  built  fifty-eight  miles  of  railroad  from 
Mendosia  to  Springfield,  at  a  cost  of  $1,000,000  and  sold  it  for  $21,000. 
Illinois'  experience  in  the  railroad  Inisiness  cost  her  $6,000,000.  Massachu- 
setts sunk  $14,000,000  in  the  same  line.  The  state  of  Pennsylvania  built 
and  operated  what  was  known  as  the  Allegheny  Portage  railroad.  While 
operating  it  the  running  expenses  amounted  to  $3,161,000,  and  its  gross 
receipts  to  only  $2,985,000.  In  "Railways  andEepublic,"  by  J.  F.  Hud- 
son, may  be  found  the  following  : 

The  canals  and  railways  built  by  that  state  (Pennsylvania)  and  op- 
erated by  it  for  nearly  twenty  j^ears,  are  well  known  as  an  illustration 
of  the  evils  of  political  management  in  business  enterprises.  They  are 
salient  examples  of  the  demoralizing  effect  which  politics  and  public 
works  can  exert  on  each  other ;  and  the  constant  strife  for  their  patron- 
age, its  use  for  political  rewards,  and  the  expensive  administration  and 
unsatisfactory  revenues  of  the  roads  finally  led  the  state  to  part  with 
them. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  inquire  why  men  -will  not  do  business  for  the 
public  as  economically  as  they  will  for  themselves.  The  fact  that  they 
do  not  is  sufficient.  Even  that  great  reformer  and  advocate  of  socialism, 
Hazen  S.  Pingree,  now  governor  of  Michigan,  falls  down  when  the  test 
is  applied.  As  mayor  of  Detroit  in  1897,  in  a  special  message  to  the 
council,  he  made  this  statement : 

"It  is  well  known  that  the  total  amount  of  money  invested  in  street 
railways  m  the  city  of  Detroit  is  not  more  than  $5,000,000.'' 

And  yet  this  same  Hazen  S.  Pingree  is  trjung  to  buy  this  same  street 
railway  for  the  cit}'  of  Detroit,  and  is  willing  to  have  the  city  pay 
$17,500,000  for  it.      He  would  hardly  buy  it  for  himself  at  that  price, 

TAUNTON,  Mass. ,  plant,  $145,301 ;  have  1,200  candle  power  lamps, 
and,  as  stated  by  the  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Commissioners,  cost  $73.12 
per  year,  burned  2,144  hours,  costing  .034  per  hour,  and  furnishing  352 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

TITTJSVILLE,  Pa.,  plant,  $16,320  ;  natural  gas  ;  operating  expenses, 
$4,750.38;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $816  ;  depreciation,  $816;  taxes  and 
insurance,  $160;  making  $6,548.38,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  3,500 
hours,  costing  .0157  per  hour,  and  furnishing  1,273  candle  power  per 
hour  for  one  cent. 

TOPEKA,  Kan.,  plant,  $76,434.85;  coal,  $2  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $10,484.60;  interest  at  five  per  cent.  $3,820.74;  depreciation, 
$3,820.74;  taxes  and  insurance,  ^764;  making  .$18,900.08,  cost  of  street 
lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0335  per  hour,  and  furnishing  597 
candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

TARENTUM,  Pa.,  plant,  $32,000  ;  coal,  $1.50  per  ton  ;  operating 
expenses,  $7,000  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  $1,600  ;  depreciation,  $1,600  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $300;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $1,000  ;  making 

124 


$11, .000,  less  income,  85,000,  and  we  have  $6,000,  as  cost  of  street  ligrhts 
burned  4,000  hours,  custiuj^  .023'J  per  hour,  and  furnishing  o02  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

VINTON,  Iowa,  plant,  .*20,000:  coal,  81.88  per  ton;  operating 
exi)euse«,  ^-1,000  ;  interest  at  five  per  cent,  81,000  ;  depreciation,  il  1,000  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $200;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $320;  making 
$0,.020,  lees  income,  84,300,  and  we  have  $2,220,  as  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  1,800  hours,  costing  .0280  per  hour,  and  furnishing  409  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

WHEELING,  W.  Va.,  plant,  $125,000  ;  coal,  81.09  per  ton  ;  oper- 
ating expenses,  822.1 10.04  ;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  87,500  ;  depreciation, 
•86,250  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  81,250  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $8,000  ; 
making  845,110.04,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  4,000  hours,  costing  .0225 
per  hour,  and  furnishing  800  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

WESTFIELD,  N.  Y.,  plant.  $18,000;  coal,  $2.10  per  ton;  oper- 
ating expenses,  82,000  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $520  ;  depreciation, 
86.50  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  8130  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  8600  ;  making 
$6,100,  less  income,  $2,000,  and  we  have  $4,100,  as  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  3,120  hours,  costing  ,0164  per  hour,  and  furnishing  1,219  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

WASECA,  Minn.,  plant,  $20,000;  coal,  82.85  per  ton;  operating 
expenses,  84,875:  interest  at  six  per  cent,  $1,200  ;  depreciation,  81000  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  82U0  ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  5^750  ;  making 
88,125,  less  income,  .S5,130,  and  we  have  82,894,  as  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  1,500  hours,  costing  .0507  per  hour,  and  furnishing  394  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

WAKEFIELD,  Mass..  plant,  $187,.500  ;  use  1,200  candle  power 
lamps  and  cost,  as  made  by  the  Gas  and  Electric  Light  Coinmissionera, 
$83.30  per  year,  burned  1,365  hours,  costing  .06  per  hour,  and  furnishing 
200  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

WELLSTON.  Ohio,  plant,  $30,000;  coal,  80  cents  per  ton;  oper- 
ating expenses,  $4,600;  interest  at  six  per  cent,  .$1,800;  depreciation, 
¥1,500  ;  taxes  and  insurance,  8300;  making  $8,200,  less  income,  $4,000, 
and  we  have  $4,200,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  2,000  hours,  costing  .0318 
per  hour,  and  furnishing  377  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

WELLS  RIVER,  Vt.,  i)lant,  $1.5,000  ;  water  power  ;  operating 
expenses.  .$500  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  .$600  ;  depreciation,  $750  ; 
taxes  and  insurance,  •'?100  :  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $7.00  ;  making 
$2,700,  less  income,  $1,143,  and  we  have  $1,.5'")7,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  2,000  hours,  and  costing  $24.71  per  lamp  per  j'ear  for  incandescent 
lights. 

125 


WINTERSET,  Iowa,  plant.  $20,000  ;  operating  expenses,  $4,000  ; 
interest  at  four  per  cent,  $800  ;  depreciation,  $1,000;  taxes  and  insurance, 
$200 ;  sinking  fund  to  pay  bonds,  $900  ;  making  $6,900,  less  income, 
$5,000,  and  we  have  $1,900,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  1,400  hours, 
costing  .0335  per  hour,  and  furnishing  358  candle  power  per  hour  for  one 
cent. 

WATERVLIET.  N.  Y.,  plant,  $84,000  ;  operating  expenses,  $8,000; 
interest  at  four  per  cent,  81,360;  depreciation,  $1,700;  taxes  and 
insurance,  $340;  making  $11,400,  cost  of  street  lights  burned  4, COO 
hours,  costing  .0247  per  hour,  and  furnishing  809  candle  power  per  hour 
for  one  cent. 

WILMINGTON,  Ohio,  plant.  $30,000  ;  they  report  that  the  ,entire 
cost  of  lights  per  year,  including  interest  and  depreciation,  is  $3,200. 

An  examination  shows  a  pay  roll  of  $2,200  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent, 
$1,200  ;  depreciation,  $1,500:  fuel,  $1,500  ;  making  $0,420  per  year,  not 
including  carbons,  repairs,  oil,  waste,  renewals  or  taxes. 

WAPAKONETA,  Ohio,  plant,  $31,000:  coal,  $2.15  per  ton  ;  oper- 
ating expenses,  $5,134.08;  interest  paid,  as  given  ))j  citj'  clerk,  $1,820; 
depreciation,  $1,550;  taxes  and  water  rent,  $310;  sinking  fund  to  pay 
bonds,  $950  ;  making  $9,764.08,  less  income  from  private  consumers, 
$4,740.74,  and  we  have  $5,023.34,  cost  of  69  street  lights,  being  $72.80  per 
lamp  per  year,  burned  3.2U0  hours,  costing  .033  per  hour,  and  furnishing 
606  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

YPSILANTI,  Mich.,  plant,  $25,000;  water  power;  operating 
expenses,  $3,000  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $1,000  ;  depreciation,  $1,250; 
taxes  and  insurance,  $250  ;  making  a  total  of  $5,500,  cost  of  street  lights 
burned  1,900  hours,  costing  .0273  per  hour,  and  furnishing  733  candle 
power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

CRAWFORD VILLE,  Ind.,  plant,  $105,000;  operating  expenses, 
$16,936.22  ;  interest  at  four  per  cent,  $4,200  ;  depreciation,  |5,2G0  ;  taxes, 
$1,000  ;  making  $27,386,  less  all  income,  including  $240  for  lighting  city 
buildings  and  lamps  sold,  $10,697.00,  and  we  have  $16,689,  being  $115.89 
per  lamp  per  year,  burned  on  moonlight  schedule  to  1  a.  m.  ,  costing 
.0526  per  hour,  and  furnishing  380  candle  power  per  hour  for  one  cent. 

The  above  figures,  except  depreciation  and  taxes,  are  the  same  as 
given  in  the  superintendent's  report  to  the  city  council  for  year  ending 
May  31-,  1900. 

In  their  construction  account  is  an  item  of  $12,000  for  free  wiring. 

See  also  page  74. 


126 


LEGAL  AND  OFFICIAL  OPINIONS  FROM  SOME 
OF  THE  MOST  PROMINENT  MEN  IN  THE 
NATION. 

JUDGE  COOLEY,  Interstate  Commerce  Commissioner,  says : 
"  There  seems,  therefore,  to  be  strong,  if  not  controlling  reasons,  when- 
ever the  supply  of  a  public  convenience  can  assume  the  form  of  a  private 
and  continuous  business,  for  permitting  it  to  take  that  form  and  for 
granting  to  individuals  the  necessar}'  franchise  for  the  purpose." 

He  further  says,  "That  this  species  of  legislation  has  been  exceed- 
ingly mischievous  in  its  results,  that  it  has  created  a  great  burden  of 
public  debt  on  which,  in  a  large  number  of  cases,  the  anticipated  benefit 
was  never  received,  and  that,  as  is  likely  to  be  the  case  where  municipal 
governments  take  part  in  projects  foreign  to  the  purposes  of  their 
creation,  it  has  furnished  unusual  facilities  for  fraud  and  public  i)lunder, 
and  led  almost,  at  last,  to  discontent,  sometimes  even  to  disorder  and 
violence." 

Ex-GOV.  RUSSELL  of  Massachusetts  voiced  the  people  when  he 
stated  before  a  committee,  "That  the  matter  involves  a  most  serious 
question  of  public  policy,  namely,  whether  it  is  wise,  necessary  and  safe 
to  reverse  the  policy  that  has  governed  towns  and  cities  for  2o0  years  and 
allow  them  to  go  into  these  enterprises  with  all  the  hazards,  risks,  and 
liabilities  that  attend  the  investment  of  money  in  private  industrj'.  I  am 
one  of  those  who  believe  that  it  is  the  duty  of  government  not  to  crush 
out  individual  enterprise  and  energy,  but  to  aid  it.  I  believe  in  the 
principle  of  government  helping  men  to  make  the  most  of  themselves, 
and  industries  to  make  the  most  of  themselves,  but  not  in  a  paternal 
government  to  which  we  must  all  look  for  leave  to  act,  or  think,  or 
speak.  And  I  believe,  on  that  principle,  it  is  of  doubtful  expediency 
for  a  state  or  government  to  undertake  to  control,  in  this  way,  private 
enterprises." 

MR.  IVINS  says  :  ' '  It  is  because  we  fear  our  army  of  office- 
holders that  conservative  men  look  upon  the  paternal  and  regulating 
tendency  of  goverment  with  undisguised  dread." 

W.  T.  BURT  of  Wheeling,  West  Va.,  a  city  which  has  run  its  gas 
plant  since  1870,  says:  "  Owing  to  politics  our  city  has  not  been  success- 
ful in  getting  good,  competent  public  servants.  Unfortunately,  our 
civil  service  is  not  separate  from  politics." 

127 


JOHN  MITCHELL  of  Richmond,  a  member  of  the  board  of  al- 
dermen of  that  city,  says :  ' '  All  positions  are  filled  by  the  spoils  sys- 
tem,    llepviblicans  rigidly  excluded." 

W.  W.  COOK  of  the  New  York  Bar,  says:  "If  our  large  cities 
shoukrmanage  their  natural  monopolies  their  governments  would  be- 
come El  Doradoes  of  political  freeboters  and  mountebanks." 

HON.  SETH  LOWE,  ex-mayor  of  Brooklyn  and  president  of  Co- 
lumbia College,  says  :  "  Few  American  cities  have  exercised  so  great 
a  competency  in  the  business  already  in  their  hands  as  to  justify  a  very 
strong  presumption  that  they  would  manage  lighting    works." 

PROF.  GRAY  says:  "It  is  bej'ond  any  doubt  whatever,  much 
more  in  harmonj^  with  the  theory  and  philosophy  of  democratic  govern- 
ment than  municipal  ownership." 

PROF.  WHITNEY  says  :  "  That  an  engineer  loses  his  professional 
dignity  and  standing  by  entering  the  service  of  a  city.  Every  new  posi- 
tion placed  at  the  disposal  of  the  city  officials  tightens  the  grasp  of  the 
'  ring  boss  '  upon  the  treasury  of  the  city." 

PROF.  ASHLEY  of  Harvard  University,  who  was  at  Toronto 
at  the  time  the  changes  were  made  in  their  municipal  management,  says: 
"  I  am  thoroughly  in  favor  of  private  management.  I  came  to  this 
opinion  after  four  years'  experience  of  Toronto  city  government,  starting 
originally  with  a  very  strong  leaning  toward  municipal  management." 

PROF.  ROSEWATER  of  Columbia  College,  says:  "If  we 
turn  now  to  the  cost  statistics  of  electric  lighting  under  municipal  own- 
ership of  the  plant,  we  strike  a  complication  no  less  j^serious.  At  the 
very  beginning  of  every  such  investigation  we  find  ovirselves  in  the 
chaos  of  American  municipal  bookkeeping.  When  two  cities  employ 
the  same  system  of  accounts,  when  in  the  same  cities  the  reports  of  the 
different  departments  furnish  irreconcilable  data,  the  statiHtican  must 
seek  to  extricate  himself  as  best  he  can.  It  would  scarcely  be  stating 
the  case  too  strongly  if  you  should  say  that  out  of  the  probable  100  mu- 
nicipalities owning  their  own  electric  lighting  plants,  not  five  could  pre- 
sent an  intelligible  showing  of  their  operation  for  the  period  of  one 
year.  The  blame  for  this  does  not  attach  entirely  to  the  city  officials, 
for  conditions  exist  in  many  localities  which  render  a  clear  financial 
account  a  thing  next  to  an  impossibility. 

PRES.  HOPKINS  of  the  National  Street  Lighting  Association 
is  opposed  to  the  municipal  ownership  of  electric  light  plants.  And 
this  conclusion  has  been  reached,  he  says,  after  years  of  careful  study 
of  the  comparative  merits  presented  by  the  operation  of  public 
service  systems  by  private  contract  and  by  municipalities,  and 
from  a  comparison  of  statistics  of  relative  economy  and  efficiency  col- 

128 


Iftted  from  ftU  the  Inrper  cities  of  the  country.  Mr.  Hopkins  said  if  pol- 
itics conlcl  be  eliminnted  from  the  jiroposition  of  municipal  ownership, 
it  mitrht  prove  to  be  a  desirable  system  of  snppljiuj^  pul)lic8ervice,  but  as 
lou^  as  politics  is  permitted  to  enter  into  the  administration  of  public 
service,  there  is  little  to  be  gained  in  placing:  expensive  electric,  gas  or 
water  plants  in  the  bands  of  untutored  and  inexperienced  politicians. 

Mr.  Hopkins  is  strongly  opposed  to  the  muuicijtal  otvuership  of 
electric  light  plants,  or  gas  plants  either  for  that  matter. 

•'  When  I  Hrst  became  interested  in  cit}'  lighting."  he  said,  "  I  was 
enthusiastic  over  muuicipal  light  plants,  and  especially  over  municii)al 
electric  light  plants.  I  thought  it  was  the  only  way  a  city  should  be 
lighted.  I  have  devoted  several  years  since  then  to  the  collection  of 
statistics,  and  have  made  a  very  careful  and  exhaustive  study  of  the 
question.  And  as  a  result  I  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  there  is 
nothing  whatever  in  it. 

"Politicians  do  not  make  good  electricians,  and  I  regret  to  say  this 
country  is  not  yet  ready  for  muuicipal  electric  light  plants. 

"Xow  3'ou  tell  mej'ouhave  an  ordinance  pending  before  your  council 
now  for  the  erection  of  a  municipal  electric  light  plant.  Well,  in  the 
first  place,  if  the  ordinance  is  passed  you  will  have  to  issue  !5i200,000  or 
•5800,000  bonds.  This  is  just  that  much  property  taken  from  the  tax 
duplicate,  for  if  the  plant  were  not  erected  by  the  city  it  would  be 
erected  by  private  capital  and,  of  course,  it  -would  be  taxable.  Thea 
there  is  the  interest  on  these  bonds,  in  itself  a  large  item.  So  j^ou  start 
out  with  two  very  burdensome  losses. 

"But  the  most  important  consideration  of  the  municipal  ownership 
of  electric  light  plants  is  that  by  the  time  the  bonds  issued  for  the 
erection  of  the  plant  are  paid,  the  machinery  and  apparatus,  ahva^'s 
expensive,  are  totally  out  of  date.  Electricity  is  making  rajnd  strides, 
and  a  plant  that  was  modern  ten  j'ears  ago  is  long  since  out  of  date  now. 
And  what  is  the  result?  The  plant  that  cost  $300,000  to  build  ten  years 
ago  is  little  better  in  comparison  with  modern  equipment  than  a  pile  of 
rubbish. 

"But  the  most  serious  objection  to  municipal  ownership  at  this 
time  is  the  fact  that  all  muuicipal  service  plants  are  controlled  by 
politics.  As  I  said  before,  politicians  or  ward  heelers  do  not  make  good 
electricians.  Yoii  cannot  get  the  best  electricians  to  run  municipal 
electric  light  plants,  when  political  pulls  are  the  accepted  recommenda- 
tion. Then  again,  there  are'so  many  changes  in  administrations,  that  it 
would  be  almost  impossible  to  keep  good  men  in  charge,  if  they  were  to 
be  secured.  A  ward  heeler  has  no  business  handling  expensive  electri- 
cal machinery,  when  the  mere  turning  of  a  switch  the  wrong  way  would 
entail  the  loss  of  thousands  of  dollars.  There  may  come  a  time  when 
muuicipal  ownership  may  be  i)rotitabl3'  established,  with  politics  elimi- 
nated, but  the  country  is  not  ready  for  it  yet,  and,  therefore,  I  am 
opposed  to  it  now." 


129 

(9) 


HON.  CARROLL  D.  WRIGHT,    Commissioner  of  Labor,   at  the 
meeting  of    the  American   Economic    Association,    in    the    discussion 
of  municipal  ownership,  gave  the  true  facts  regarding  the  so-called  in-, 
vestigations  and  reports  of  committees  and  mayors  of  various  cities. 

He  said,  "  That  whenever  in  an  American  city  the  question  of  mu- 
nicipal or  private  ownership  had  come  before  the  people  the  first  prac- 
tical step  taken  had  been  the  appointment  of  a  junketing  committee 
of  inquiry  to  investigate  the  methods  and  results  of  competing  systems 
in  other  cities,  and  that  such  committees,  beginning  their  studies  in 
ignorance,  had  completed  them  in  confusion  of  mind  a  thousand-fold 
worse  than  the  original  ignorance. " 

MR.  GREENOUGH  confirmed  this  statement,  and  explained  that  the 
success  of  the  Massachusetts  Commission,  in  obtaining  exact  and  truth- 
ful balance  sheets,  is  due  to  the  immiinity  from  unnecessary  competition 
and  from  blackmailing  raids  which  existing  companies  enjoy  under  the 
protection  of  the  commission,  in  return  for  the  publicity  and  regulation 
of  charges  Avhich  the  commission  forces  upon  them. 

SENATOR  LOUD,  chairman  of  Commission  on  Postoffices,  says  : 
"  It  is  an  incontestible  fact  that  the  government  cannot  conduct  any  line 
of  business  as  economically  as  an  individual  or  a  corporation  can," 

DECISION  OF  THE  SUPREME  COURT   OF    MASSACHUSETTS. 

In  this  opinion  Justices  Field,  Allen,  Knowlton,  Morton  and 
Lathrop,  say:  "We  are  not  aware  of  any  necessity  why  cities  and 
towns  should  undertake  this  form  of  business  any  more  than  many 
others  which  have  always  been  conducted  by  private  enterprise,  and  we 
are  not  called  upon  to  consider  what  extraordinary  powers  the  common- 
wealth may  exercise  or  mfey  authorize  cities  and  towns  to  exercise  in 
extraordinary  exigencies  for  the  safety  of  the  state  or  the  welfare  of  the 
inhabitants.  If  there  be  any  advantage  to  the  inhabitants  in  buying 
and  selling  coal  and  wood  for  fuel  at  the  risk  of  the  community,  on  a 
large  scale,  and  on  what  has  been  called  the  co-operative  plan,  we  are  of 
the  opinion  that  the  constitution  does  not  contemplate  this  as  one  of  the 
ends  for  which  the  government  was  established,  or  as  a  public  service  for 
which  cities  and  towns  may  be  authorized  to  tax  their  inhabitants." 

JUSTICE  WILDE  of  the  supreme  court  of  Massachusetts  said  : 
*'  The  limitation  upon  the  power  and  authority  of  towns  to  enter  into 
contracts  aTid  stipulations  is  a  wise  and  salutary  provision  of  laws,  not 
only  as  it  protects  the  rights  and  interests  of  the  majority  of  the  legal 
voters,  but  as  it  may  not  infrequently  prove  beneficial  to  the  interests  of 
the  majority,  who  may  be  hurried  into  rash  and  unprofitable  specula- 
tions by  some  popular  and  delusive  excitement,  to  the  influence  of  which 
even  wise  and  considerate  men  are  sometimes  liable." 


130 


DR.  A.  T.  HADLEY,  president  of  Yale  University,  uu  imlilic  t\iu\ 
private  ownership,  says  :  "  To  those  who  h>ok  at  the  suhjec-t  superticially 
it  sometimes  seems  as  thourrh  private  enterprise  meant  manap^emeut  of  in- 
dustry by  the  few  for  the  few,  state  control  management  by  the  few,  but 
for  the  people,  and  direct  state  ownership  management  l)y  the  people 
and  for  the  people.  This  view  of  the  matter  is  urged  by  mau}'  who  are 
anxious  for  a  change  in  the  direction  of  increased  state  activity.  How- 
ever, it  can  be  readily  shown  to  be  in  niau^'  respects  fallacious. 

'"In  the  lirst  i)lace,  whatever  S3'stem  is  adopted,  the  management  will 
be  in  the  hands  of  the  few.  *•*•*#  xhe  legislature,  as  at 
present  constituted,  is  elected  for  purposes  other  than  the  control  of  in- 
dustrial enterprise,  and  that  this  coml)ination  of  functions  affords  man- 
ifold opportunities  for  misunderstanding  and  corruption.  Control  of 
orticials  bj'  the  l)allot  has  the  disadvantage  that  the  responsibility  is  re- 
mote. Elections  occur  at  such  infreciuent  intervals  that  there  is  an  op- 
portunity for  the  perpetuation  of  many  serious  abuses  before  the}'  can 
lie  checked.  It  is  also  true  when  jjarties  have  Ijeen.freipientlj'  changed 
that  it  is  difficult  to  tix  on  the  otticials  of  one  party  rather  than  another 
the  responsiltiiitj-  for  anj'  particular  stage  of  industrial  all'airs.  Finallj', 
even  in  the  best  managed  government,  there  is  danger  that  there  will  be 
a  good  deal  of  politics  in  the  selection  of  administrative  officials. " 

R.  P.  PORTER,  on  municipal  ownership  in  England,  says  :  "No 
wonder  the  tax  payers  and  commercial  l)odies  of  England  are  up  in  arms 
against  a  scheme  for  the  suppression  of  fair  dealing  by  the  unlimited 
enlargement  of  the  functions  of  government.  The  nearest  api)roach  to 
this  organization  whi'>h  we  have  in  the  United  States,  is,  at  the  present 
moment,  advocating  the  repeal  of  the  wise  constitutional  provisions  in 
so  many  state  constiutions  which  limit  the  creation  of  debt.  RulHed  by 
these  wise  provisions  in  their  attempt  to  bring  about  the  British  condi- 
tion of  affairs  in  the  United  States,  the  American  advocates  of  munic- 
ipal trading  have  discovered  that  this  obstacle  must  be  removed 
before  municipilization  of  profit-making  industry  is  'possible.  While, 
therefore,  the  form  the  (luestion  is  taking  in  the  United  States  is  a  little 
different,  the  object  sought  to  l)e  attained  is  precisely  the  same. 

"  These  are  some  of  the  specific  charges  which  will  be  made  during 
the  next  session  of  parliament  against  what  the  English  call  municipal 
trading,  but  which  we  exploit  under  the  term  municipal  ownership. 
The  general  charges  are  equally  worth  considering,  and  should  start 
those  advocating  these  schemes  for  the  United  States  thinking.  These 
charges  completely  dispose  of  the  four  stock  arguments  of  the  municipal 
owuershiji  advocates  in  the  United  States,  which  are,  as  is  as  well  known, 
(d)  that  municipalities  can  borrow  more  cheaply'  than  private  individuals; 
[h)  that,  if  a  profit  can  be  made  out  of  the  general  supply  of  some 
Commodity  for  the  community,  why  should  not  the  community  realize 
that  profit  for  itself  ;  ('•)  that  the  motives  of  private  adventure  are  self- 
seeking  and  sordid,  and  contrast  unfavorably  with  the  disinterestedness 
of  the  city  aldermen  (New  York,  Philadelphia,  and  Chicago,  for  example) ; 

131 


(d)  that  some  of  these  enterprises  are  in  the  nature  of  monopolies,  and 
that  it  is  better  that  the  government  should  be  a  monopolist  than  a 
private  person.  To  this  case  of  the  municipal  trader,  which  I  have  put 
in  a  nut  shell,  the  English  opponent  of  municipal  socialism  aptly  and 
vigorously  replies,  sustaining  his  opinion  with  an  array  of  data  that 
confounds  the  college  professor  and  socialistic  clergymen  who  have 
rushed  madly  into  the  municipal  ownership  arena,  and  want  our  cities  to 
absorb  alike  all  the  lighting  and  street  railway  enterprises." 

E.  KIBLEB,  member  of  Ohio  Commission,  says:  "It  seems  to 
me  that  the  great  barrier  to  good  municipal  government  in  the  United 
States  is  the  almost  complete  domination  of  the  machinery  of  municipal 
government  by  partisan  politics,  and  the  prevalance  of  that  almost  crimi- 
nal idea  that  citj'  government  is  the  legitimate  spoils  of  partj^  politics. 
The  contest  has  become  to  be,  not  which  man  will  best  serve  the  public 
interests,  but,  rather,  which  set  of  politicinns  shall  gain  the  right  to 
distribute  the  fruits  of  municipal  government  among  its  party  zealots. 

"  For  some  reason  or  other,  the  people  generally  have  very  little  of 
abiding  interest  in  municipal  affairs.  They  find  themselves  practically 
unable  to  participitate  in  the  nomination  of  candidates  for  municipal 
ofiices  ;  compelled  to  vote  for  candidates  who  represent,  merely,  party 
politics,  and  not,  m  any  sense,  the  popular  choice  ;  except  upon  conditions 
to  which  they  are  unwilling  to  submit,  they  find  themselves  unable  to 
obtain  official  positions,  or  have  their  qualifications  receive  even  quasi 
consideration,  and  they  look  upon  municipal  aifairs  in  general  as  the 
exclusive  property'  of  the  politician,  as  the  natural  monopoly  of  partisan 
politics,  and  there  is  a  feeling,  more  or  less  vague,  that  there  is  a  moral 
taint  in  enlisting  in  a  contest  for  place. 

'  *  Can  anybody  conceive  of  a  good  reason  why  there  should  be  any 
party  nominations  or  party  candidates  for  any  municipal  office,  or  the 
pertinence  of  any  inquiry  as  to  the  opinions  entertained  upon  subjects 
of  national  politics  by  a  candidate  for  mayor  or  the  city  council  ?  " 

H.  L.  DOHERTY,  says  :  "  One  of  my  political  friends  once  wrote 
me  as  follows  : 

"  '  They  (the  people)  want  it,  and  I  am  on  record  as  favoring  it.  I 
am  no  longer  so  sure  I  am  right,  but  there  are  other  reforms  that  I  know 
I  am  right  about.  Were  I  to  experience  a  change  of  heart  on  this 
question  it  would  remove  all  chances  of  my  election,  and  would  elect  my 
opponent,  who  knows  less  about  this  subject  than  I,  and  who  has  but  this 
one  plan  in  mind. 

"  '  No  matter  what  my  personal  views  may  be,  my  election  will  make 
me  their  servant.' 

"A  majority  of  them  (city  officials)  already  know  that  municipal 
ownership  is  a  rank  fallacy,  but  they  are  too  wise  to  express  views 
contrary  to  the  people  they  must  look  to  for  re-election.  By  champion- 
ing these  views  even  though  they  know  them  to  be  wrong,  oflfers  an 
easy  road  to  office." 

132 


E.  W.  BLISS  saj's :  "Under  muuicipal  owuership  and  operation 
the  tax  payer  takes  all  the  risk.  If  street  car  patrons  are  promised  lower 
fares,  as  a  Ijribe  for  their  votes,  and  cast  votes  enough  to  elect  a  mayor 
and  a  council  pled<^ed  to  fix  a  four  cent,  a  three  cent,  or  even  a  two  cent 
fare,  and  the  income  from  the  fares  fails  to  pay  all  costs  of  ownership  and 
operation,  tax  paj-ers  must  pay  the  loss.  From  this  there  is  no  escape. 
In  l)ut  one  way  can  tax  paj-ers  take  security  aj^aiust  this  inevitable 
catastrophe.  They  must  see  to  it  that  the  law  j^rautiuf?  power  to  the 
municipality  to  own  and  operate  street  railroads  shall  provide  that  they 
shall  be  controlled  by  a  scientific  system  of  regulation  ;  that  their 
accounts  shall  be  kept  as  prescribed  b}-  the  state,  subject  to  state  audit, 
and  shall  show  the  entire  and  true  costs  of  ownership  and  operation  ; 
that  the  council  shall  not  permit  any  free  service,  and  that  it  shall  not 
fix  a  rate  of  fare  less  than  the  true  cost  of  the  service,  plus  the  annual 
reciuirement  for  a  sinking  fund  to  pa}-  the  bonds  issued  in  behalf  of  the 
purchase  of  the  property'.  If  tax  payers  do  not  secure  this  safeguard  for 
their  protection  when  municipal  ownership  comes,  the  losses  thej'  will  be 
compelled  to  pay  will  be  a  just  penalty  for  their  neglect  of  duty." 

B..  P.  PORTER,  who  has  recently  returned  from  England,  says : 
"The  advocates  of  municipal  ownership  in  the  United  States  are 
threatened  with  a  movement  in  England,  which  may  knock  the  under- 
pinning from  their  structure  and  bring  down  the  edifice  with  a  crash. 
The  epidemic  of  municipfll  trading,  and  interference  with  private 
enterprise,  may  be  arrested  bj'  a  petition  to  parliament  for  a  royal  com- 
mission, or  joint  committee  of  parliament,  to  define  the  extent  to  which 
municipal  trading  shall  be  sanctioned  bj-  the  legislature.  The  contention 
of  a  large  and  iutiueutial  body  of  Englishmen,  who  have  liecome 
thoroughly  alarmed  at  the  present  situation,  is  that  individual  eft'ort  in 
England  is  being  crushed  and  enterprise  stifled  by  miinicipal  interfer- 
ence ;  that,  unless  a  vigorous  opposition  is  organized  against  these 
encroachments  of  the  municipality,  the  national  consciousness  will  be 
stifled  in  the  coils  of  the  boa  constrictor  bureaucracj'  as  effectualh-  as  it 
has  been  in  Germany.  The  facts  in  relation  to  this  iiuportaut  movement, 
which  was  only  crystalized  a  few  months  ago,  will  come  as  a  surprise  to 
those  in  the  United  Htates  who  have  accepted,  without  (juestion,  the 
conclusions  of  enthusiastic  writers  or  half-baked  economists  in  relation 
to  the  achievements  of  municipal  trading  in  England.  If  onlj'  a  part  of 
the  acts  alleged  as  a  basis  for  parliamentary  action  and  a  halt  in  this 
tendency  to  state  omnipotence  be  true,  the  disillusioning  is  likel}'  to  be 
as  complete  as  it  will  l)e  sudden.  The  immediate  cause  for  alarm  and 
dissatisfaction  on  the  part  of  tax  payers  is  the  increase  of  local  indebted- 
ness and  taxation  since  the  inauguration  of  municipal  trading." 

J.  B.  CAHOON  says:  "Municipalities  have  not  conducted  their 
bookkeeping,  so  far  as  their  electric  lighting  plants,  or  even  their  water 
companies  are  concerned,  on  a  strictly  business  basis,  and  have,  there- 
fore, omitted  many  charges  that  should  have  been  made  against  the 
operation  of  the  plant.     For  instance,  municipal  and  state  taxes  in  many 

183 


instances  have  been  omitted  entirely  as  a  charge  against  the  plant. 
Interest,  in  some  cases  that  have  come  to  my  knowledge,  has  been 
omitted  even,  while  few,  if  any,  of  the  municipal  plants  charge  anything 
to  depreciation,  and  none  of  them,  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  learn, 
has  charged  anything  in  the  year's  operating  expenses  against  the 
provision  for  the  retirement  of  bonds  at  maturity. 

"Hence,  in  reporting  the  costs  of  operation,  they  are  invariably 
reported  very  much  below  what  the  real  cost  is.  Strict  business  methods 
must  be  applied  to  a  municipal  plant,  just  the  same  as  to  a  private  plant, 
otherwise  you  simply  deceive  yourself  and  place  the  burden  of  your 
mistake  iipon  the  future  generation.  During  some  eighteen  years' 
experience  in  electrical  matters,  and  for  many  of  those  years  being  so 
situated  as  to  be  able  to  get  at  the  actual  cost  of  operation,  my  experi- 
ence tells  that  nt)  municipality,  however  conscientiously  they  may  try, 
can  operate  a  plant  as  cheaply  as  a  private  corporation.  The  factors  for 
economy  are  not  with  the  municipal  plant ;  the  same  incentive  to  economy 
is  not  there. 

"  In  general,  if  you  would  compare  the  cost  of  the  operation  of  a 
plant  by  a  municipality  and  the  operation  by  i)rivate  parties,  you  must 
take  into  consideration  these  things  :  First,  the  cost  of  the  materials 
consumed ;  second,  salaries  and  wages  ;.  third,  miscellaneous  general 
expenses ;  fourth,  insurance  on  property  ;  fifth,  employes'  liability 
insurance ;  sixth,  insurance  against  accidents  to  the  public ;  seventh, 
municipal  taxes,  relinquished  ;  eighth,  state  taxes,  paid  or  relinquished  ; 
ninth,  depreciation,  at  least  five  per  cent  on  apparatus  ;  tenth,  provision 
for  retiring  bonds  at  maturity." 

M.  A.  .GTJNUNDER.  secretary  Trustees  of  the  Sinking  Fund, 
Columbus,  Ohio,  upon  municipal  management,  says  :  '*  Some  years  ago 
I  had  occasion  to  examine  into  some  reports  published  by  the  state  of 
Ohio  as  to  the  cost  of  making  gas  at  the  state's  plant.  Figures  were 
published  and  spread  broadcast,  which  were  so  low  as  to  cause  many  a 
private  corporation  to  squirm.  I  examined  the  plant  itself,  as  well  as  the 
published  reports.  The  most  astonishing  thing  connected  with  the  whole 
affair  was  the  admission  on  the  part  of  the  superintendent  that,  for 
sometimes  six  months  at  a  time,  no  records  at  all  had  been  kept.  The 
state  possessed  no  station  meter,  or  other  meters  to  speak  of,  and  about 
everj'thing  was  guessed  at.  It  was,  therefore,  no  surprise  to  find  the 
official  report  showing  that  the  output  exceeded  the  amount  of  gas  made. 
With  revolutions  in  the  political  wheel  came,  also,  changes  in  superin- 
tendents. One  of  these  complained,  rather  bitterly,  as  follows  :  '  Not- 
withstanding the  fact  that  I  expected  to  find  the  works  in  a  bad  condition, 
I  certainly  did  not  expect  to  find  them  in  such  a  dilapidated  state  as  I 
did.  There  were  no  retorts  in  the  works  fit  for  use  ;  in  fact,  about 
everything  had  been  exhausted,  and  nothing  replaced  that  could  possibly 
have  been  avoided ;  I  suppose,  in  anticipation  of  a  change  in  administra- 
tion. I  am  satisfied  that  the  expense  of  making  the  necessary  repairs, 
and  to  enlarge  sufficiently  to  meet  all  demands,  would  be  equally  as 


much,  if  not  more,  tbau  to  build  new  works,  with  capacity  to  meet 
all  requirements  for  years.'  A  further  inspection  shows  that  the  lowest 
cost  -was  reported  by  the  superintendent  who  had  let  thin<^8  ^o  to  ruin, 
and  as  soon  as  the  works  were  in  sjood  condition,  strange  to  say,  the  cost 
rose  about  25  per  cent.     Evidently,  no  trustworthy  invoices  were  taken." 

ALLEN  R.  FOOTE.  says:  "Gentlemen  temporarily  responsible 
for  the  etlicieut  manaL,'ement  of  public  i)lants  must  feel  an  overwhelming' 
sense  of  gratitude  for  the  service  rendered  them  by  unscieutitio  econo- 
mists, who,  having  a  theory  to  prove,  never  permit  statistical  accuracy 
to  spoil  their  story. 

''  The  most  striking  feature  is  the  shown  infallibility  and  the  attested 
remarkable  ability  of  those  having  charge  of  municipally  owned  and 
operated  industries. 

"  By  means  of  a  system  of  unfair  and  unscientific  statistical  compari- 
sons, these  gentlemen  are  shown  in  every  instance,  in  spite  of  the  handi- 
cap of  inexperience,  lack  of  technical  knowledge,  want  of  direct  personal 
interest,  and  the  inflexibility  of  governmental  management,  to  have 
obtained  results  which,  if  true,  would  at  once  cause  every  corporation 
manager  to  be  consumed  with  envy.  So  couTincingly  is  this  proof  pre- 
sented, it  can  hardly  fail  to  cause  these  gentlemani}'  municipal  officials 
to  ask  themselves  why  they  have  been  able  to  ailmiuister  these  particu 
lar  public  plants  so  much  more  efficiently  than  they  have  any  other 
pulilic  trust  ? 

"  Whj^  they  have  managed  them  so  much  more  efficiently  than  similar 
private  plants  are  managed  by  those  who  devote  their  entire  time  and 
the  best  energies  of  their  lives  to  such  management,  and  have  their 
fortunes  invested  at  the  risk  of  their  management  ? 

"  Why  they  have  been  able  to  manage  public  business  so  much  more 
efficiently  than  they  can  manage  their  own  private  business  ? 

"  This  evidence  must  cause  all  persons  who  have  the  ability  to  think 
analytically  to  ask  why  managers  possessing  such  consumate  ability  are 
serving  the  public  for  little  or  no  pa^'',  while  corporations  are  charged 
"7ith  paying  enormous  salaries  for  the  management  of  similar  industries 
and  politicians  are  charged  with  being  in  business  '  for  what  there  is  in 
it  for  them  ?' 

' '  Politicians  and  communities  who  permit  themselves  to  lie  guided  by 
such  evidence  must  in  due  time  pay  the  inevitable  penalty  for  actions 
based  on  error. 

'•  A  shade  of  doubt  is  cast  over  the  infallibility  of  these  professors  by 
the  admission  by  one  that  '  a  criticism  should  therefore  be  made  upon 
those  cities  which  entered  upon  municipal  electric  lighting  eight  or  ten 
years  ago.'  Why  ?  Turn  back  and  examine  the  literature  of  this  subject 
written  by  these  same  professors  eight  or  ten  years  ago  and  you  will 
find  that  they  were  as  certain  then,  as  they  are  now,  that  municipal  own- 
ership and  operation  was  a  correct  policy,  that  they  were  as  impatient  of 
delays  then  as  now,  and  that  the  very  cities  they  now  criticise  for  adopt- 
ing this  policy  then  were  iyduced  to  adopt  it  by  their  teachings.      What 

135 


value  can  an  intelligent  person  place  on  statistical  comparisons  which 
make  and  repeat  the  error  of  comparing  a  present  reported  cost  with  a 
contract  price  paid  years  ago,  and  ignoring  the  price  at  which  the  con- 
tract could  have  been  renewed  when  the  public  plant  was  installed. 

"  Worse  still,  what  statistical  value  can  attach  to  an  opinion  that  to 
compare  present  public  cost  with  present  private  selling  price  is  an  error. 

"  What  value  can  statistical  results  have,  calculated  by  those  who 
argue  that  the  item  of  taxes  may  be  omited  altogether  ? 

"  What  must  be  thought  of  the  intelligence  of  statisticians  who  claim 
that  "where  a  city  is  accumulating  a  sinking  fund,  or  is  paying  its  debt  to 
this  amount  annually,  no  additional  provision  is  required  for  a  deprecia- 
tion fund?  On  ha\'iug  reckoned  depreciation  at  saj'  five  per  cent  as  part 
of  the  cost  in  a  given  year,  both  interest  and  depreciation  must  be  reck- 
oned the  next  year  at  only  95  per  cent  of  the  value  of  the  plant  the 
year  before. 

"A  sinking  fund  is  for  the  purpose  of  replacing  the  capital  invested, 
obtained  from  other  sources,  with  capital  obtained  from  another  source. 

"A  depreciation  is  for  the  purpose  of  insuring  an  investment  against 
impairment. 

'■  To  represent  that  a  dollar  paid  into  one  fund  makes  the  placing  of  a 
dollar  in  the  other  fund  unnecessar3%  or  that  a  dollar  paid  into  depreci- 
ation fund  reduces  the  investment  account,  is  a  mistake  so  simple  and 
glaring  it  cannot  fail  to  place  those  responsible  for  it  under  the  burden 
of  voluntary  error. '' 


AN  INSOLVENT  UTOPIA. 

BY   GUILD    A.    COPELAND. 

It  was  only  two  j^ears  ago  that  Mayor  Josiah  Quincy  began  in 
Boston  his  experiments  that  were  so  widely  described,  at  the  time,  in 
the  American  press.  He  aimed  to  build  up  a  model  city  government, 
■whose  employes  should  themselves  do  the  work  that  in  other  cities  is  done 
by  contract  or  through  private  firms.  So  Boston  was  not  content  merely 
to  have  departments  for  building,  cleaning,  or  repairing  streets  or  water 
sj^stems  or  sewers.  Its  stationery  and  printing  work  was  turned  out  by 
one  city  bureau.  Another  bureau  was  established  for  carpenter  work, 
repair  work  of  various  kinds  on  the  public  buildings,  and  even  for  elec- 
trical construction  and  repair.  An  ice  plant  was  established  for  cutting 
and  storing  ice  to  be  used  in  the  drinking  fountains.  Veterinary  bureaus 
were  devised  to  look  after  the  horses  used  in  city  work.  Of  course  the 
horses  themselves  were  bought  for  the  city.  Wheelwrights,  blacksmiths, 
painter  i  and  letterers,  and  a  whole  army  of  labor  came  into  the  city's 
employ. 

136 


This  was,  in  effect,  the  nearest  approach  to  the  development  of  the 
*' muuicipal  ownership  "  idea  ever  seen  iu  any  American  muuicii)ality. 
It  was  a  modified  form  of  socialism,  and  at  the  outset  it  won  hii^ch  praise. 
The  city  wixs  to  save  the  money  heretofore  paid  iu  middlemen's  or  cor- 
poration's profits,  and  was  not  to  allow  greedy  contractors  to  wring  dis- 
honest profits  from  the  municipal  treasury.  The  painful  announcement 
that  the  whole  scheme  is  now  discredited,  and  is  a  sal)ject  for  popular 
ridicule,  may  cause  some  sorrow  among  those  municipal  statesmen  else- 
where who  have  been  so  strongly  out  he  side  or'  "  municipal  ownership," 
as  a  theorj^  which  might  save  American  cities  from  present  evils. 

The  knowledge  of  the  failure  of  the  schemes  for  dispensing  with  the 
services  of  greedy  corporations  or  contractors  has  come  rather  suddenly 
upon  Boston.  An  old  Boston  business  man  and  banker,  T.  N .  Hart, 
was  elected  mayor  last  December,  and  began  his  term  on  New  Year's 
day.  Soon  afterward  he  was  asked  to  sign  some  vouchers  for  city  work, 
and  was  struck  by  the  estimates  of  cost  of  material  and  labor.  He  saw 
that  they  were  far  above  the  current  rates,  and  he  began  to  make  a  quiet 
investigation.  The  result  has  been  that  one  after  another  of  these  much- 
heralded  and  much-lauded  city  bureaus  has  been  closed  up,  as  hopelessly 
extravagant. 

From  the  statement  of  a  skilled  workman  who  held  a  high  place  in 
one  of  these  bureaus,  l)iTt  was  powerless  to  do  much  in  the  way  of  cor- 
recting abuses,  a  lew  figures  are  worth  quoting.  Reckoning  up  the  cost 
of  material  at  the  current  quotations,  and  the  probable  cost  of  labor 
necessary  to  do  the  work  under  the  supervision  of  any  reliable  con- 
tractor or  business  house  in  Boston,  he  found  that  a  job  of  electrical 
equipment  on  the  ferry  boats  operated  by  the  city  should  have  cost 
$6,800.  As  a  matter  of  record,  it  actually  cost  $10,200.  The  electrical 
work  on  a  city  building  for  hospital  nurses  should  have  cost  $1,328.  It 
really  cost  $4,754.  The  work  on  a  city  armory  shoiild  have  cost  less 
than  $2,600,  but  the  city  had  to  pay  nearly  $6,700  lor  the  job.  Some 
work  on  a  public  school,  estimated  as  likely  to  cost  $1,471  if  done  under 
contract,  cost  the  city  about  $3,600. 

Meanwhile,  investigations  were  being  pushed  in  other  directions. 
The  city's  ice  plant  made  an  inviting  field.  After  the  statisticians  had 
finished  figuring  on  that  piiblic  spirited  enterprise,  it  was  found  that  the 
ice  used  by  the  water  department  in  the  drinking  fountains  cost  about 
$60  a  ton,  when  it  might  have  been  bought  from  the  local  ice  companies 
for  $2  or  $3  a  ton.  Orders  were  immediately  given  to  get  rid  of  the  ice 
plant  at  the  best  possible  terms,  lest  the  outlay  thus  created  might 
weaken  Boston's  credit  if  the  plant  should  be  in  operation  much  longer. 
If  a  customer  could  have  been  found  for  the  municivml  printing  plant, 
that,  too,  might  have  been  unloaded  at  once.  Some  investigations  into 
the  cost  of  the  operation  of  the  plant  indicated  that  outside  parties  would 
have  done  its  work  at  least  twentj'-five  per  cent  below  the  prices  actually 
charged,  and  would  certainly  have  done  much  better  work. 

Thus,  in  one  bureau  after  another,  practically  the  same  situation 
was  found.      Instead  of  saving  money  by  doing  all   kinds  of  citj'  work 

137 


directly  by  city  employes,  the  city  has  been  brought  into  debt  tremend- 
ously; so  that  to-day  the  debt  is  over  four  times  the  limit  fixed  by  the 
state  legislature,  the  excess  having  been  borrowed  xmder  special  legisla- 
tive acts.  The  interest  on  this  debt,  with  sinking  fund  payments,  now 
amounts  to  more  tliau  the  entire  amount  annually  raised  by  taxation  for 
all  city  purposes,  outside  of  the  school  expenditure. 

It  is  worth  notice  that  amid  all  these  revelations,  which  have  stunned 
Boston,  there  is  no  charge  of  any  such  dishonesty  as  wonld  call  for  legal 
proceedings.  There  has  been  no  embezzlement  of  money.  The  sums 
expended  are  covered  by  proper  vouchers,  stored  in  the  municipal 
records.  That  there  was  wasteful  and  extravagant  folly  is  certain,  but 
the  crime  is  not  one  covered  by  the  statutes  of  the  commonwealth.  The 
failure  of  the -experiment  Avas  due  to  political  interference. 

The  reason  why  it  cost  anywhere  from  twenty-five  to  fifty  per  cent 
more  for  Boston  to  do  its  own  work  than  an  outside  business  firm  would 
have  charged  for  that  work,  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  pay  rolls 
of  the  different  bureaus  were  absolutely  loaded  down  with  political 
appointees.  The  heads  of  the  bureaus  hhd  to  submit  to  this  for  self- 
evident  reasons.  The  appropriations  for  their  work  were  fixed  by  the 
city  council.  If  an  alderman  asked  to  have  a  friend  appointed,  and  the 
request  was  not  granted,  that  aldei-man  might  cut  down  the  appropria- 
tion for  the  bureau  so  as  to  cripple  it.  Hence  the  request  was  usually 
granted. 

Since  Mayor  Hart  came  into  office  he  has  been  compelled  to  make 
so  many  removals  in  the  interest  of  economy,  that  it  is  now  estimated 
that  some  $500,000  or  !*!C00,000  has  been  saved  to  the  city  already.  Early 
in  his  term,  on  meeting  with  the  head  of  the  bureau,  he  suggested  that 
if  there  were  any  superflous  men  in  that  branch  of  the  service  they  be  re- 
moved ;  but  he  added  that  he  did  not  want  one  man  disturbed  whose 
services  weie  nee  Jed.  The  next  day  the  head  of  the  bureau  brought  in 
a  report  saying  that  at  least  one-third  of  his  force  could  be  discharged 
at  once  without  any  harm  to  the  efficiency  of  the  bureau. 

In  the  municipal  printing  plant,  under  the  Quincy  regime,  one  of 
the  employes  was  notoriously  unsatisfactory.  He  was  told  that  his 
services  were  not  needed  and  that  he  could  consider  himself  dismissed. 
He  replied  jauntily  that  even  the  public  printer  did  not  dare  discharge 
him.  This  impudent  reply  resulted  in  his  prompt  discharge.  Yet  he 
came  back  the  next  day,  and  said  coolly  to  his  superior:  "Alderman 
Blank  of  South  Boston  says  I'm  to  go  back  to  work  ;  but  if  you  make  any 
kick  about  it  I'm  to  have  your  place  and  you  go.  See  ?"  And  he  did 
stay,  although  his  work  was  as  unsatisfactory  as  before. 

It  might  be  supposed  that  the  civil  service  laws  would  interpose  some 
obstacle  to  loading  the  service  down  with  ,iriefficient  men  ;  but  it  was 
found  that  there  were  some  ways  of  evading  th&civil  service  laws.  If  the 
men  had  applied  for  work  as  skilled  workmen  or  as  ordinary  employes 
they  would  have  been  compelled  to  show  their  fitness  ;  but  many  of  the 
applicants  were  made  for  service  under  queer  trades,  not  generally  sup- 
posed to  be  needed  in  the  city's  work..  Often  it  would  happen  that  the  ap- 

138 


plication  thus  put  in  would  be  the  only  one  of  its  kind.  The  civil 
service  commissioners  had,  of  course,  prepared  no  examination  for  such 
a  trade.  The  applicant  was  registered,  and  then  there  would  promptly 
follow  a  requisition  for  just  such  a  worker  for  one  of  the  city  depart- 
ments. 

In  a  list  of  about  fifty  men  who  were  employed  in  the  water  depart- 
ment on  clerical  work,  or  in  inspectingr  hydrants  or  water  pipes,  it  was 
found  that  one  had  entered  as  a  ''  copi)eremith,"  another  as  a  ''  ship- 
calker,"  and  another  as  an  "expert  swimmer.''  There  were  "  sailors," 
'"  dial  makers,"  "rubber  gasket  makers."  ''riggers,"  and  "splicers,'' 
"miners,"  "stonecutters,"  '"  beam  tenders,"  "wiremen"  and  "rod- 
men  "  in  the  list,  also,  each  demanded  by  special  requisition  for  a  man 
of  that  trade.  About  every  branch  of  human  effort  except  that  of 
"  expert  balloonist  "  or  "skilled  animal  trainer  "  may  be  found  in  these 
special  reciuisitions  ;  and  the  only  reason  these  were  overlooked  is 
probably  that  they  did  not  occur  to  the  fertile  brains  of  the  ingenious 
evaders  of  the  civil  service  laws. 

As  has  been  said,  the  different  departments  Avere  so  overloaded  with 
employes  that  the  expenses  of  running  them  were  far  greater  than  would 
have  been  the  expenses  of  an  ordinary  business  firm  doing  the  same 
work  but  employing  far  less  men.  In  order  to  make  a  show  of  being 
self  supporting,  the  departments  were  obliged  to  charge  for  each  job 
much  more  than  it  was  worth.  On  paper  the  departments  were  self- 
supporting.  Only  a  few  months  ago  an  investigating  committee  from 
New  York  was  convinced  that  the  printing  plant  was  financially  a  suc- 
cess ;  but  the  charges  made  by  the  printing  bureau  for  its  work  were 
much  higher  than  the  price  at  which  the  same  work  could  have  been 
done  by  private  firms. 

What  would  have  been  the  result  if  the  Boston  experiment  had  been 
carried  out  upon  a  businesslike  basis  is  a  question  which  may  be  dis- 
cussed bj'  theorists.  What  actually  resulted  has  been  shown.  As  com- 
pared with  the  political  conditions  in  New  York.  Philadelphia,  Chicago, 
or  San  Francisco,  Boston  political  methods  are  popularly  supposed  to  be 
as  pure  as  the  most  widely  advertised  brand  of  toilet  soap.  Yet  Boston 
has  learned,  with  mixed  emotions  of  surprise,  pain  and  chagrin,  the  re- 
sults of  its  own  experiment  in  public  operation  of  public  business.  The 
question  of  "  municipal  ownership  "  has  been  settled  for  Boston.-  The 
proposed  Utopia  has  been  forced  into  insolvency,  and  a  hard-headed 
Y'^ankee  banker  is  now  engaged  in  winding  up  its  accounts  in  a  prudent 
manner. 

It  may  be  added  that  in  the  mean  time  those  public  franchises  that 
have  been  operated  by  private  capital  in  Boston  are  paying  good  divi- 
dends :  but  they  are  run  on  business  princii)als,  and  without  any  inter- 
ference on  the  part  of  politicians.  Possibly  there  is  some  American 
city  where  the  Boston  experiment  could  be  repeated  without  political 
interference  ;  but  I  do  not  profess  to  know  just  where  that  city  is  to  be 
found. 


139 


J.  G.  BOYD,  says:  In  several  instances  when  the  writer  was  selling 
and  erecting  electric  light  plants  throughout  the  coixntry,  he  was  asked 
his  opinion  of  the  feasibilit}'  and  desirability  of  municipal  ownership.  He 
seldom  had  but  one  reply  to  make  to  the  query  and  that  was  this  :  "  Do 
you.  sir,  realize  that  when  j'ou  cast  your  vote  for  municipal  owner- 
ship that  you  have,  in  effect,  mortgaged  your  property  by  the  proposed 
issue  of  bonds,  from  the  sale  of  which  is  to  be  derived  the  funds  to  cre- 
ate such  an  enterprise,  by  virtue  of  the  fact  that  you  will  have  to  pay 
interest  on  those  bonds  and  provide  a  sinking  fund  for  their  final  pay- 
ment ?"  Of  course  many  of  the  voters  are  not  property  owners  and  are 
disinter-ested  in  that  phase  of  the  question,  but  usually  they  are  in  the 
minority.  We  all  of  us  understand  how  the  disciple  of  municipal  own- 
ership, in  his  presentation  of  the  so  called  merits  of  his  scheme,  is  wont 
to  '"paint  the  lily  and  throw  a  perfume  o'er  the  violet;"  he  represents 
to  them  how  municipal  ownership  will  reduce  the  cost  of  these  commodi- 
ties, and  the  undertaking  is  entered  upon  with  enthusiasm.  In  the  first 
few  j-ears.  or  during  the  period  of  dress  parade  conditions,  the  showing 
and  the  balance  sheet  certainlj^  appear  attractive  :  then  as  extraordinary 
repairs  become  necessary,  then  at  once  becomes  apparent  the  'direct 
restilt  of  political  preferment  in  the  selection  of  a  major  domo.  and 
the  negative  era  is  entered  upon  with  the  advancement  of  many  natural 
reasons  therefor.  Here  is  where  the  non-property  owner  commences  to 
pay  the  fidler  for  his  dance,  earned  through  the  ballot  box  with  his  bond- 
voting  ballot  in  his  hand,  and  inasmuch  as  his  income  is  quite  limited, 
in  the  end  he  sufi'ers  the  most,  and  the  longer  the  industry  is  operated 
the  harder  he  is  hit  by  increased  taxes. 

The  Electrical  World  and  Enqineer  give  extracts  from  Prof. 
Shepardson's  paper  on  municipal  ownership,  which  shows  some  exper- 
iences with  municipal  plants  : 

PROF.  G.  D.  SHEPARDSON,  in  a  paper  on  municipal  ownership, 
read  at  the  recent  convention  of  the  Northwestern  Electrical  Association, 
recited  some  incidents  illustrating  the  incompetent  management  of  some 
municipal  plants.  The  state  of  the  records  kept  in  some  of  them  is.  he 
said,  almost  incredible.  In  several  towns  there  is  no  complete  record 
of  the  service  connections  to  the  water  Avorks  and  electric  plants.  In  one 
place,  a  new  superintendent  found  it  necessary  to  shut  off  the  water  to 
enforce  the  payment  of  back  water  rents.  There  was  no  plan,  of  the 
water  mains  or  services.  He,  therefore,  was  compelled  to  open  the 
streets  and  search  for  the  cut-offs,  for  which  purpose  the  service  of  a 
chain  gang  from  the  county  jail  was  secured.  In  another  town,  when 
the  collector  was  getting  a  promise  of  paj^ment  from  a  merchant,  he  was 
requested  to  bring  in  the  bill  for  the  meter  in  the  barn  at  the  same  time. 

The  collector  held  his  own  council,  and  discovered  a  meter  with  a 
number  of  lights,  for  which  no  record  could  be  found.  In  that  town, 
the  only  account  books  found  were  an  electric  light  book  with  monthly 
columns  for  accounts  of  customers,  and  an  individual  account  book  for 
water  consumers,   there  being  no  record  of  purchases,  repairs  or  any 

1-iO 


other  expences.  In  auother  place,  by  a  careful  caiivass  of  the  towu  aud 
au  examination  of  the  Hues,  water  aud  lijifhts  were  added  to  the  record 
of  about  ^UUO  income  per  year,  and  no  one  knew  how  louj^  they  had  been 
getting:  free  service.  In  another  place,  where  the  rates  are  low  aud  the 
water  power  leaks  badly,  so  that  it  ia  necessary  to  spend  several  thous- 
and dollars  at  once,  the  superintendent  is  confident  that  the  plant  is 
clearing  about  $800  net  profits  per  month.  In  another  town  "  there 
are  no  records  and  no  system  of  accounts." 

Closely  allied  to  poor  systems  of  bookkeeping  is  the  incompetency 
of  the  city  clerk  or  collector  who  has  charge  of  records  and  collectious. 
They  do  not  iinderstand  the  business,  aud  naturally  do  not  make  it  pay. 
In  one  instance  the  collector  knew  practicallj^  nothing  of  the  station 
working,  was  ignorant  of  the  station  output,  amouut  of  coal  used  for 
electric  part  of  plant,  etc.  Owing  to  iuefHcient  aud  incompetent  officers, 
all  sorts  of  prices  were  charged  for  supplies  and  work  furnished  the 
city.  For  example,  a  plumber  was  paid  $2.20  for  a  valve  costing  90 
cents,  and  other  items  in  proportion.  In  another  place,  the  innocent 
recorder  was  beguiled  into  paying  a  higher  price  for  a  new  lot  of  incan- 
descent lamps,  "  because  they  had  more  watts  than  the  kind  formerly 
used." 

The  committees  of  the  town  councils  are  often  green  hands  and  of  little 
value  in  udmiuisteriug  municipal  plants.  In  one  place  a  former  collector 
had  been  found  short  in  his  accounts,  and  a  committee  was  appointed  to 
check  his  work.  After  two  days  upon  his  books,  they  made  a  report  on 
the  shortage,  which  was  made  good,  and  the  bondsmen  were  immediately 
discharged.  Soon  after,  when  the  water  rents  came  due,  a  number 
of  people  were  found  to  have  his  receipts  for  dues  which  had  not  been 
credited  on  the  books,  but  the  man's  bondsmen  had  been  released,  and 
the  town  had  a  considerable  sum  to  charge  to  profit  aud  loss.  A  com- 
mittee went  over  a  lot  of  old  Accounts,  and  found  that  their  predeces- 
sors had  approved  reports  in  which  there  were  serious  defects,  Ijiat  lest 
they  should  seem  to  reflect  on  the  abilities  of  their  friends,  the  superin- 
tendent  was  instructed  to  call  it  square,  and  open  a  fresh  account  with 
each  person  whose  accounts  were  found  faulty  in  former  reports. 

A  case  recently  occurred  in  a  neighboring  state,  showing  how  sht)rt- 
sighted  some  councils  are  in  regard  to  franchises.  A  company  applied 
for  a  franchise  to  furnish  light  and  power  from  a  water  power  not  far 
awaj','  iuteuding  to  spend  about  $30,000  in  the  plant.  After  dallying 
aloug  for  some  time,  the  franchise  was  grauted  by  the  council,  but 
vetoed  by  the  mayor,  who  wanted  a  municipal  plant.  Although  the  towu 
■was  already  within  $8,000  of  its  bond  limit,  it  voted  bouds  in  that  amount 
to  build  a  plant,  hoping  that  in  some  providential  way  it  could  put  in  a 
plant.  In  one  towu,  where  a  committee  of  the  council  was  supposed  to 
keep  track  of  matters,  a  superintendent  managed  to  do  away  with  over  a 
thousand  lamp  renewals  in  a  single  year,  of  which  there  is  mo  account. 
Over  $800  worth  of  fixtures  sold  without  record  were  traced. 

The  superintendents  of  municipal  plants  are  often  iucompeteut.  The 
superintendent  of  one  plant  where  they  still  use  GO-volt  transformers, 

141 


heard  of  the  saving  in  using  large  transformers,  so  he  bought  one  and 
tried  to  supply  50  lamps  one  block  distant  by  a  No.  6  wire  (assuming 
one  ampere  per  lamp  and  400  feet  to  the  block  would  give  a  drop  on  the 
line  of  about  22  volts).  The  superintendent  was  sure  that  No.  6  was 
large  enough,  for  the  insurance  rules  said  it  would  carrj'  it  all  right. 
The  trouble  was,  therefore,  in  the  transformer,  and  he  compelled  the 
agent  to  trade  it  for  three  small  ones.  The  large  one  "  did  not  regu- 
late" as  well  as  the  small  ones,  and  he  is  sure  that  the  modern  idea  of 
large  transformers  with  secondary  net  works  is  a  mistake  and  a  failure, 
for  he  tried  it. 

In  another  town  of  about  4,000  inhabitants,  a  technically-trained 
superintendent  is  saving  about  $6,000  annuallj'  above  the  records  of  his 
predecessors.  In  a  smaller  town,  a  similar  man  is  saving  between  two 
and  three  thousand  dollars  annually  to  the  town  on  account  of  more 
skillful  management.  He  increased  the  revenue  by  $100  in  a  single 
month  by  using  better  transformers  and  lamps,  although  the  station  out- 
put was  10  per  cent  less.  The  station  output  was  materially  lessened  by 
inspection  of  the  circuits  and  tying  up  the  lines  where  they  had  fallen 
upon  the  cross-arms.  Incandescent  lamps  on  flat  rates  taking  58 
to  70  watts,  were  replaced  by  53-watt  lamps  with  marked  economj^.  In 
another  station  the  superintendent  confided  to  an  agent  that  he  was 
bothered  about  learning  the  frequency  of  his  alternator.  The  agent 
said  it  was  too  complicated  a  matter  for  him  to  figure  off-hand,  but  he 
would  calculate  it  when  he  returned  to  his  office.  The  agent  found  that 
the  practice  of  his  own  company  in  similar  cases  was  to  use  125  cycles, 
and  he  reported  that  the  superintendent  had  such  frequency.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  it  was  140,  and  the  speed  was  marked  on  the  machine.  In 
one  town  the  chief  reason  whj"  one  alderman  voted  in  favor  of  one  sys- 
tem against  a  lower  bid,  was  that  his  preference  was  the  machine  with 
the  "  kilowatts,"  while  the  cheaper  machine  was  a  "multipolar"  machine, 
and  he  preferred  kilowatts  to  multipolars. 

In  the  laudable  endeavor  to  secure  economy,  the  mayor  and  council 
frequently  lose  at  the  bung  while  saving  at  the  spigot.  This  occurs  both 
in  the  first  purchase  of  the  plant  and  in  its  later  operation.  After 
one  town  had  voted  to  put  in  a  lighting  plant,  the  maj^or  took  a  trip 
to  learn  what  he  could.  After  consulting  with  several  agents  and 
getting  propositions  from  them,  he  called  upon  an  engineer,  who  was 
given  to  understand  his  services  would  be  required.  After  spending 
some  hours  pumping  him,  the  mayor  left  and  went  home,  where  he 
concluded  that  he  was  enough  of  an  engineer  himself  to  lay  out  the 
plant.  So  he  bought  some  machines,  hired  a  wireman,  and  the  plant 
was  put  in.  At  another  place,  a  resident  bought  some  second-hand 
machinery,  and  after  putting  it  in  operation,  sold  it  to  the  town  for 
what  it  would  cost  when  new.  In  a  few  weeks  they  had  to  spend  about 
a  hundred  dollars  for  repairing  the  armature,  and  then  had  to  buy  a  new 
machine. 

At  another  place  they  decided  to  secure  a  cheap  engineer  to  design 
their  plant.  He  specified  a  20  horse  power  gasoline  engine  to  operate  a  600- 

142 


light  dynamo,  and,  in  addition,  to  drive  the  pumping  machinery  for  the 
water  works.  The  cotmcil  made  a  contract  for  the  gasoline  engine, 
as  specified,  including  a  proviso  that  if  a  steam  phmt  were  substituted, 
the  gas  engine  contractor  was  to  receive  a  commiseiou  of  1")  per  cent 
of  the  cost  of  the  steam  plant.  It  is  reported  that  this  was  actually  done 
and  paid.  Two  of  the  larger  towns  of  the  state  were  contemplating 
municipal  ownership,  and  each  secured  the  services  of  an  inexperi- 
enced 3'oung  man  to  prepare  plans  and  specifications  for  the  i)laut ;  in 
one  case,  because  he  was  a  friend  or  relative  of  one  of  the  committee  ; 
in  the  other  case,  probably  because  he  was  cheap.  The  country  is 
full  of  half-baked  electricians  who  pose  as  engineers  and  as  advisers  to 
investors. 

There  is  frequeutl3'  an  attempt  to  reduce  operating  expenses  too 
far.  At  one  place  the  council  discjiarged  a  good  engineer  and  hired 
another  because  he  was  cheap.  Within  three  daj-s  he  got  his  cjiinder 
full  of  water  and  broke  the  girder  of  the  Corliss  engine.  It  is  common 
even  with  a  privately-owned  station,  to  attempt  economy  by  hiring 
cheap  firemen,  since  any  one  can  shovel  coal  or  throw  wood.  But 
owners  fail  to  recognize  that  by  paying  ten  to  twent\'  dollars  more 
for  securing  a  capable  fireman,  they  are  ai)t  to  save  his  extra  wages  sev- 
eral times  over  in  reduced  fuel  bills. 

In  some  cases  there  is  great  loss  on  account  of  downright  dishonesty 
of  the  superintendent  or  the  council  committee.  A  citj-  emploj'ing  an 
honest  superintendent  with  liberal  pay  and  some  backing  in  the  coun- 
cil, will  often  prevent  small  and  also  large  steals  which  are  almost 
invarial)]y  found  in  municipal  departments,  such  as  lamp  renewals 
(on  which  it  is  difficult  to  keep  accurate  account  or  check),  "  rake-offs" 
on  purchases  for  the  plant,  for  which  in  the  end  the  city  pays. 
One  supply  company  offered  a  new  superintendent  as  high  as  20  per  cent 
on  all  purchases  the  year  round,  as  they  had  alwaj's  done  so. 
This  is  substantiated  by  old  bills.  Lamps  are  checked  up  once  a  month 
while  burniuff,  and  one  is  often  asked  to  go  easy  in  counting,  being 
offered  all  sorts  of  bribes  from  cigars  or  drinks  to  considerable  sums 
in  cash.  Certain  officials  are  known  to  have  received  special  conces- 
sions in  this  way,  amounting  to  several  hundred  dollars  per  year.  All 
this  could  have  been  prevented  by  a  proper  system  of  checking,  but 
at  best  comes  down  to  one  man  being  honest.  Carloads  of  wood 
have  been  sold  "  by  the  car,"  by  former  saperinteudeuts.  An  investiga- 
tion bj"  an  alderman  indicated  that  a  loss  of  over  81,000  per  j'ear  had  been 
received  from  that  source  alone.  In  another  place  the  city  recorder  is 
said  to  collect  the  accounts,  and  sometimes  sublets  the  job  to  his 
friends,  who  knock  down  about  half  and  turn  the  balance  over  to  the 
recorder,  who  in  turn  transmits  to  the  treasurer  so  much  of  it  as  suits 
his  convenience,  there  being  no  records  and  no  other  system. 

The  political  conditions  prevent  best  results  in  many  plants.  Where 
the  employes  are  appointed  by  aldermanic  inffuence,  it  is  not  uncommon 
for  an  underling  to  retort  to  his  superior  officer,  when  corrected 
for    some    shortcoming,      "  Oh,    well,    I    have    more    pull    than    you 

143 


have,  and  what  are  yoii  going  to  do  about  it?"  In  one  town,  until  re- 
cently, the  plant  was  operated  by  two  parties,  an  engineer,  who  took 
care  of  the  station,  and  a  lineman  in  charge  of  outside  "work.  These 
parties  were  not  on  speaking  terms,  and,  of  course,  each  attibuted  all 
trouble  with  the  lights  to  the  other  man's  part  of  the  plant.  This  state 
of  affairs  continued  for  several  years,  during  which  time  the  arc  system 
was  in  bad  condition,  the  lineman  attributing  it  to  the  dynamo,  and  the 
engineer  laying  it  to  the  lamps.  When  a  change  was  made,  there  were 
two  applicants  for  lineman  ;  one  a  good  man  who  would  have  attended 
to  business,  the  other  was  a  young  son  of  one  of  the  aldermen,  and  with 
little  experience  or  ability.  There  were  also  two  applicants  for  fireman  ; 
one  a  good  man,  and  the  other  a  lazy,  goo-d-for-nothing  fellow  who 
claimed  to  have  considerable  influence  in  the  country,  so  that  he  could 
turn  considerable  trade  to  some  ©f  the  stores  in  which  the  aldermen 
were  interested.  By  combining  forces,  the  poorer  man  was  appointed 
in  each  case. 

There  is  a  continual  struggle  between  the  temperance  and  the  saloon 
element  in  most  of  the  towns,  and  when  a  new  election  puts  the  oppo- 
sition into  power,  the  superintendent  is  almost  sure  to  lose  his  place  in 
favor  of  some  friend  of  the  new  management.  In  one  town  the  super- 
intendent had  found]  the  station  and  accounts  in  very  bad  shape,  and 
was  getting  them  into  fair  condition,  when  the  election  went  "wet." 
The  next  day  the  new  mayor  informed  the  superirftendent  that  he  would 
give  him  any  kind  of  a  recommendation  he  might  ask  for. 

JOHN  H.  PERKINS,  superintendent  of  the  water  department, 
Watertown,  Mass.,  in  his  annual  report  makes  a  strong  plea  for  justice 
to  the  water  commissioners  of  the  town.  The  department  is  not  paying 
expenses,  and  what  revenue  there  is  comes  from  the  private  consumers. 
The  injustice  of  this  course  is  objected  to  by  the  water  board,  which 
points  oiTt  that  it  is  unfair  to  make  consumers,  who  do  not  represent  all 
the  owners  of  property  in  the  town,  pay  for  the  fire  protection  of  all  the 
public  and  private  property.  If  the  works  Avere  operated  by  a  private 
corporation,  the  consumers  would  make  such  a  strong  objection  to  this 
course  that/he  town  would  have  to  pay  for  hydrant  rental.  Objection  is 
also  raised  to  the  refusal  of  the  selectmen  to  pay  for  water  for  the  town 
departments.  It  is  claimed  that  water  is  supplied  to  schools,  for  exam- 
ple, that  it  is  furnished  for  general  town  purposes,  and  should  be  paid 
by  the  school  department  just  as  much  as  coal  or  the  salaries  of  the 
teachers.  To  compel  the  portion  of  the  residents  who  pay  rates  to  bear 
all  this  expense  is  to  tax  a  few  for  the  benefit  of  all. 

PROF.  J,  L.  LAUGHLIN  of  the  Chicago  University,  says  :  "Should 
the  municipalities  own  such  quasi-public  institutions  ?  In  answering  the 
question  we  must  always  bear  in  mind  the  fact  that  under  municipal 
ownership  these  properties  must  be  managed  on  business  principles, 
with  great  ability  and  sagacity,  for  a  profit.  Is  it  reasonable  to  suppose 
this  can  and  will  be  done  in  American   municipalities  ?     And  we  must 

l-itt 


also  bear  in  mind  the  solemn  fact  that  municipal  government  is  to-day 
admitedly  the  one  branch  of  American  political  experiment  in  which  we 
have  failed.  That  is  unfortunate,  but  it  is  a  fact  which  we  cnnuot'blink. 
And  it  is  no  help  in  this  disifussion  to  urge  what  might  take  place  under 
ideal  conditions — how  safe  municipal  ownership  would  be  under  honest 
aldermen,  with  a  perfect  reform  of  the  civil  service  on  the  merit  sj'stem, 
and  assuming  the  existence  of  a  vigilant  and  active  public  opinion.  We 
must  deal  with  our  municipalities  as  they  are,  and  not  as  they  might  be. 
And  in  this  connection  1  venture  to  insist — and  insist  very  strongly — 
that  the  examples  of  well-governed  municipalities  in  Europe,  like  Glas- 
gow, are,  for  the  re&sons  given  above,  aside  from  the  point.  Even 
though  municipal  ownership  of  gas  works  or  street  railways  by  Glasgow 
might  work  satisfactorily,  that  is  no  reason  whatever  whj'.  for  example, 
a  city  like  C'hicago,  composed  of  entirely  different  elements,  with  dif- 
ferent political  standards  than  those  of  Glasgow,  should  follow  this  exam- 
ple. I  am  quite  ready  to  admit  that  with  ideal  political  conditions  a 
city  like  Chicago  might  do  things  which  now  would  be  foolish  and 
unwise. 

EDMUND  E.  HIGGINS,  says  :  "  We  would  expect  that  the  British 
tramways,  so  carefully  controlled  in  the  interest  of  the  public,  would  be 
paying  a  larger  percentage  of  their  gross  receipts  into  the  iniblic  treas- 
ury than  the  '  hydra-headed  monsters  '  which  our  American  demagogues 
are  so  fond  of  talking  about  as  '  sucking  the  life  blood  of  the  people.'  " 

What  are  the  actual  facts  ? 

The  British  tramways  are  paying  into  the  public  treasury  less  than 
$600,000  in  the  form  of  taxes,  or,  but  2.4  per  cent  on  gross  receipts  of 
$35,u0O,00O,  while  the  street  railway's  of  New  York  and  Massachu- 
setts are  paying  yearly  if2, 500,000,  or,  4.7  per  cent  on  gross  receipts 
of  $50,000,000. 

Here  is  interesting  light  upon  the  virtues  and  vices  of  rigid  munici- 
pal control  of  corporate  enterprise.  If,  forty  years  ago,  British  munici- 
palities had  said  to  private  capital,  "  come  in  and  help  us  make  our  citie& 
what  they  ought  to  be,"  the  British  tramways  would  to  day  be  earning 
$;200, 000,000  gross  instead  of  less  than  $25,000,000,  and  could  be  paying 
as  taxes  from  i8,OuO,000  to  $10,000,000  a  year  into  the  public  treasury, 
instead  of  a  paltry  $000,000.  This  is  not  an  exaggeration.  The  figures 
as  stated  are  an  underestimate  rather  than  an  overestimate,  as  is  well 
understood  bj'  all  who  have  the  slightest  knowledge  of  street  railway 
finances  and  possibilities,  in  a  densely  populated  country  like  Great 
Britain. 

E.  W.  BURDETT,  referring  to  the  wild  statements  made  by  an 
advocate  of  municipal  ownership,  says: 

"Another  striking  illustration  of  the  figures  usuallj'  given  out  upon 
this  subject  are  various  articles  written  by  a  man  who  writes  articles  by 
the  j'ard  and  uses  figures  bj'  the  million.  But  he  is  one  of  that  some- 
what numerous  class  of  persons  who  know  a  great  deal  that  is  not  so. 

145 

(10) 


His  tables  are  a  comedy  of  errors,  and  yet  they  have  been  printed  widely 
and  have  undoubtedly  influenced  some  citj'  fathers  in  favor  of  municipal 
lighting." 

PROF.  MEYERS  of  Chicago,  saj^s :  "It  is  extremely  doubtful  if 
the  city  has  saved  any  money  by  operating  a  plant  of  its  own,  and  it 
seems  very  probable  that  the  expense  of  operation  considerably  exceeded 
the  amount  paid  for  hired  lamps." 

MR.  YERKES,  referring  to  the  municipal  plant  in  Chicago,  says  : 
"The  operation  of  the  electric  plant  is  to-day  a  disgrace  to  this  com- 
munity. It  is  not  economical  or  practicable  to  operate  these  industries 
by  the  municipality.  There  can  be  only  one  reason  why  it  should  be 
done,  and  that  is  to  support  an  army  of  politicians  and  their  supporters, 
who,  we  all  know,  care  little  for  work,  and  who  are  of  no  service  to  the 
industry  they  pretend  to  be  engaged  in." 

A  COMMITTEE  OF  THE  NEW  YORK  LEGISLATURE,  after 
examining  many  expert  witnesses  and  taking  two  large  volumes  of  testi- 
mony, reported  as  follows  : 

"  But  few  have  advocated  the  owncjrship  and  operation  of  railroads 
by  the  cities.  The  preponderance  of  testimony  taken  and  the  great 
majority  of  opinions  expressed  before  this  committee  is  against  the  sys- 
tem so  commonly  referred  to  as  municipal  ownership.  It  is  obvious 
that,  with  our  present  system  of  municipal  government,  the  ownership 
and  operation  of  railroads  by  the  cities  and  municipalities  would  have  a 
tendency  to  convert  these  enterprises  into  powerful  political  machines, 
the  result  of  which  would  be  detrimental  to  the  public  welfare." 

DR.  ALBERT  G.  SHAW  testified  before  the  committee  as  follows: 
"  I  have  never  dreamed  of  advocating  municipal  ownership  in  the 
City  of  New  York.     I  have  never  thought  of  it  as  a  remedy. 

"I  do  not  believe  the  conclusions  derivable  from  the  experience  of 
foreign  cities,  although  I  have  been  interested  in  them ;  but  I  never 
believed  any  experience  derived  from  them  of  any  applicability  to  our 
cities." 

The  closing  paragraph  of  the  committee's  report  is  conclusive : 
"  As  an  abstract  proposition  we  believe  that  no  government,  either 
national,  state,  or  municipal,  should  embark  in  a  business  that  can  be  as 
well  conducted  by  private  enterprise. 

"  The  reverse  of  this  proposition  carried  out  to  a  logical  conclusion 
would  put  all  business  enterprises  under  governmental  management  and 
control  and  leave  to  no  citizen  any  hope,  ambition,  or  aspiration  beyond 
that  of  seeking  an  ofiicial  position  that  affords  a  meager  existence." 


146 


EDITORIALS  FROM  NEARLY  ALL  THE  LEAD- 
ING JOURNALS  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

A  MUNICIPAL  OWNERSHIP  EXPERIMENT. 

THE  PLAIN  DEALER,  Cleveland,  Ohio,  says:  Wbat  •  muni- 
cipal  uwuersbii)  ot  public  utilities"  bus  iloue  for  some  cities  iu  the 
old  world  bus  frequently  been  approviujjly  cited  in  advocacy  of  a 
similar  procedure  in  our  own  cities.  But  tbe  arfjumeut  bas  failed 
to  convince  persons  wbo  remember  tbat  municipal  conditions  in  tbis 
country  differ  materially  from  tbose  in  most  old  world  cities.  Wlmt 
bas  been  wanted  is  an  exjierimeut  in  some  lar<^e  city  under  American 
conditions.  If  sucb  an  experiment  sbould  prove  successful,  there  would 
be  little  difficulty  in  converting  tbose  wbo  are  not  convinced  by  tbe 
Glasgow  argument. 

Although  tbe  fact  does  not  seem  to  have  been  generally  known  else- 
where, such  an  experiment  has  been  carried  on  during  tbe  last  two  years 
in  Boston,  and  its  result  is  instructively  described  by  Mr.  Guild  A.  Cope- 
laud  in  tbe  current  number  of  Harper's  W'ccklif.  Tbe  title  of  tbe  paper, 
'■  An  Insolvent  Utopia,"  suggests  the  outcome  of  tbe  elibrt  on  tbe  part  of 
municipal  government  to  do  its  own  work  better  and  cheaper  than  it  can 
be  done  by  private  enterprise. 

When  Mayor  Josiab  (^uincy  went  into  office  about  two  years  ago  he 
conceived  the  idea  of  building  up  a  model  city  government,  whose  em- 
l)lo3'es  should  themselves  do  the  work  tbat  is  done  in  other  cities  by  con- 
tract or  through  private  firms.  In  addition  to  the  usual  departments  for 
building,  cleaning  and  repairing  streets,  conducting  water  systems  and 
sewer  systems,  a  city  bureavi  was  to  turn  out  Boston's  municii)al  stationery 
and  printing  work,  and  another  bureau  was  estal dished  for  carpenter 
Work,  repair  work  of  various  kinds  on  tbe  public  l)uildiugs,  and  even  for 
electrical  construction  and  repair.  An  ice  pbint  was  established  for 
cutting  and  storing  ice  to  be  used  in  the  drinking  fountains.  Veterinary 
bureaus  were  devised  to  look  after  tbe  horses  used  in  city  work.  Of 
course,  tbe  horses  themselves  were  bought  for  tbe  city.  Wheelwright*, 
blacksmiths,  painters  and  letterers,  and  a  wliole  army  of  labor  came  into 
tbe  city's  emi)loj'.  It  was  the  nearest  approach  to  a  realization  of  tbe 
idea  of  municipal  ownership  of  public  utilities  yet  attempted  in  tbe 
United  States.  Tbe  tbeorj-  was  that  tbe  city  woubl  in  this  way  save  to 
tbe  tay  paj^ers  tbe  i)rolits  of  contractors  and  middlemen. 

Some  months  ago  Mayor  C^uiucy  gave  waj'  to  Mayor  Hart,  au  old 
Boston  business  man  and  banker.  Having  to  sign  some  vouchers  and 
estimates  for  the  city  work,  he  was  struck  by  the  figures,  which  were  far 
above  current  rates.      A   ipiiet   investigation   was   l)egun,  the   result  of 

147 


which  was  the  closing  up  of  one  after  another  of  the  much-lauded  city 
bureaus  as  hopelessly  extravagant. 

A  few  items  in  the  discoveries  made  will  illustrate  the  character  of  the 
"  economy  "  of  municipal  as  compared  with  ordinary  business  methods. 
A  job  of  electrical  equipment  on  the  ferry  boats  operated  by  the 
city  should  have  cost  $6,800.  As  a  matter  of  record,  it  actually  cost 
.$10,200.  The  electrical  work  on  a  city  building  for  hospital  nurses 
should  have  cost  ^$1,528.  It  really  cost  $4,754.  The  work  on  a  city 
armory  should  have  cost  less  than  $2,fi00,  but  the  city  had  to  pay  nearly 
$6,700  for  the  job.  Some  work  on  a  public  school,  estimated  as  likely  to 
cost  $1,471,  if  done  under  contract,  cost  the  city  about  $8,600.  The  ice 
used  by  the  water  department  in  the  drinking  fountains  cost  $60  a  ton, 
when  it  might  have  been  bought  of  the  local  ice  companies  for  $3  or 
$3  a  ton. 

The  result  of  the  "municipal  ownership"  experiment  is  an  enor- 
mous increase  of  the  city  debt  and  a  severe  strain  on  its  financial  abil- 
ities. It  is  not  charged  that  any  embezzlement  of  the  public  funds  has 
been  committed.  Every  expenditure  is  accounted  for  with  proper 
vouchers.  There  was  wasteful  extravagance  and  gross  mismanagement, 
but  no  downright  dishonesty  calling  for  legal  proceedings.  The  feature 
of  the  experiment  was  due  to  politics. 

Mr.  Copeland  says  the  reason  why  it  cost  anywhere  from  25  to  50  per 
cent  more  for  Boston  to  do  its  own  work  than  an  outside  business  firm 
would  have  charged  for  that  work  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  pay- 
rolls of  the  different  bureaus  were  absolutely  loaded  down  with  political 
appointees.  "  The  heads  of  the  bureaus  had  to  submit  to  this,  for  self- 
evident  reasons.  The  appropriations  for  their  work  were  fixed  by  the 
city  council.  If  an  alderman  asked  to  have  a  friend  appointed,  and  the 
request  were  not  granted,  that  alderman  might  cut  down  the  appropria- 
tions for  the  bureau  so  as  to  cripple  it.  Hence  the  request  was  usually 
granted." 

Boston  has  a  civil  service  system,  but  it  proved  to  be]  of  small 
protection,  the  ingenuity  of  the  politicians  having  found  various  ways  of 
evading  the  civil  service  laws.  The  Boston  experiment  is  an  object  les- 
son to  other  cities  where  ' '  municipal  ownership  of  public  utilities  "  is 
under  discussion. 

THE  NEW  YORK  TIMES  says:  "The  apostles  of  municipal 
ownership  in  this  country  have  conjured  with  the  names  of  Glasgow  and 
Nottingham.  They  have  pointed  to  the  shining  success  of  the  public 
mauagement  of  the  business  of  lighting  and  transportation  in  British 
cities  as  the  full  justification  of  their  doctrines.  That  part  of  the  Ameri- 
can imblic  which  puts  its  trust  in  the  advocates  of  municipal  ownership 
lias  been  led  to  belie  pe  that  the  wisdom  and  soundness  of  the  policy  of 
public  operation  were  solidly  established  and  put  beyond  dispute  by  the 
results  of  British  experience. 

In  a  letter  which  we  print  this  morning,  Mr.  Robert  P.  Porter 
exhibits  the  fruits  of  British  experiments  in  this  branch  of  state  social- 

148 


ism  in  a  new  and  startlincf  light.  So  far  from  being  content  with  its 
•workings,  our  English  l)rethren  are  clamoring  for  a  roj'ul  commission 
to  inquire  into  the  subject  of  "municipal  trading,"  as  the  municipal 
ownership  of  public  utilities  is  called  over  there,  with  a  view  to  finding 
a  remedy  for  the  serious  and  growing  evils  of  a  iwlicj'  that  has  i)roved 
to  be  profligate  for  the  cities  and  injurious  to  the  public. 

THE  MILWAUKEE  JOURNAL  says  :  Municipal  ownership  is 
an  experiment.  It  has  nut  vindicated  itself  conclusively  in  a  single 
instance  in  this  country.  One  reason  is  that  no  plant  is  j'et  worn  out 
among  those  called  successful. 

New  ones  start  up  with  promise  and  we  hear  of  them.  What  of 
those  abandoned  ?  Who  knows  of  them  ?  No  two  cities  are  worked  on 
the  same  plan  or  under  the  same  or  like  conditions.  It  is  all  experiment. 
The  city  of  Milwaukee  asks  Ypsilanti  what  her  lighting  costs  per  lamp 
per  j-ear.     The  reply  is,  s87. 

To  Scranton,  asking  the  same  question,  the  answer  is  838. Gl.  To 
Mobile  the  sum  is  given  at  .iiSo  7l>,  while  Steubenville  is  told  it  is  $40. 
That  is,  Ypsilanti  herself  does  not  know  within  $20  per  lamp  what  her 
lights  cost.  Suppose  some  city  were  to  ask  Milwaukee  what  the  net 
income  of  her  water  works  was  for  the  last  year  ;  how  many  different 
answers  could  be  given  from  the  reports  with  ecpial  ignorance  of  the 
exact  truth  ?  Ypsilanti  is  but  one  example — it  can  be  repeated  of  almost 
everj'  one  in  the  business. 

THE  DETROIT  EVENING  NEWS  says:  " This  is  a  government 
of  the  people,  for  the  people  and  by  the  people.  It  has  no  place  in  the 
field  of  speculation,  transportation  or  commerce.  It  has  no  right  to 
expend  money  either  ior  the  convenience  or  advantage  of  classes  that 
are  so  small,  when  compared  with  the  whole  body  of  citizens,  that  they 
do  nut  numerically  warrant  the  expenditure  for  their  advantage.  It  has 
no  right  to  engage  in  business  that  is  outside  the  sphere  of  legitimate 
governmental  activity." 

THE  NORTH  AMERICAN  REVIEW  says  :  "  The  constant  ele- 
ment in  municipal  affairs  is  the  unremitting  desire  of  the  politician  to 
gather  masses  of  votes,  and  of  the  contractors  to  place  men  who  furnish 
them  to  prey  upon  the  citj'  treasurj'.  The  peojile  who  do  not  pay  are 
always  ready  to  create  debts  against  the  jieople  who  must  pay. 

"'They  who  do  not  paj' the  piper  are  ever  ready  to  dance  to  his 
music' " 

THE  NEWARK  ADVERTISER  says:  ''It  is  a  part  of  the  plan 
by  which  it  is  proposed  that  the  government  should  own  and  operate  all 
public  enterprises  of  its  kind,  or  anj'  other. 

"In  fact  it  is  only  necessary  to  carry  tlie  argument  a  little  farther 
and  make  the  government  paternal  in  every  respect,  giving  it  the  right 
to  operate  all  business  enterprises,  and  even  to  feed  the  people." 

149 


THE  TIMES,  LOWELL,  Mass.,  says  :  "  If  the  cities  in  this  com- 
monwealth should  ever  p:et  control  of  gas  and  electric  lighting,  it  is  to 
be  hoped  they  will  manage  the  general  illuminating  department  better 
than  they  have  some  other  departments.  If  thej''  do  not,  we  shall  be  in 
semi-darkness  half  the  time.     Why  not  let  well  enough  alone  ?" 

THE  BOSTON  DAILY  TRAVELLER  says:  "  We  are  not  aware 
of  any  necessity  why  cities  and  towns  should  undertake  this  form  of 
business  any  more  than  others  which  have  always  been  conducted  by 
private  enterprises,  and  we  are  not  called  upon  to  consider  what  extra- 
ordinary power  the  commonwealth  may  exercise  or  may  authorize  cities 
and  towns  to  exercise  in  extraordinary  exigencies  for  the  safety  of  the 
state  or  the  welfare  of  the  inhabitants.  If  there  be  any  advantage  to  the 
inhabitants  in  buying  and  selling  coal  and  wood  for  fuel  at  the  risk  of 
the  community  on  a  large  scale,  and  on  what  has  been  called  the  co-op- 
erative plan,  we  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  constitution  does  not 
contemplate  this  as  one  of  the  ends  for  which  the  government  was 
established,  or  as  a  public  service  for  which  cities  and  towns  may  be 
authorized  to  tax  their  inhabitants." 

THE  WEEKLY  SENTINEL,  LA  MARS.  Iowa,  says:  "Many  of 
the  people  argue  that  it  would  be  cheaper  to  make  a  close  and  careful 
bargain  with  some  company.  They  say  that  it  is  better  to  keep  such 
things  out  of  politics.  That  a  man  whose  business  and  living  depend 
upon  the  successful  managment  of  the  works  would  be  more  likely  to 
run  them  well  than  a  committee  of  the  city  council,  that  would  be 
changed  every  election  ;  that  the  owner  would  devote  his  whole  time  to 
the  matter  for  years,  and  that  officials  could  only  give  it  a  part  of  their 
attention. 

"  They  also  argue  that  public  work  usually  cost  more  than  private 
work,  just  as  graders  working  under  contract  on  a  railroad  move  more 
dirt  than  men  who  work  by  the  day  to  work  out  their  poll  tax  on  city 
streets  or  country  roads." 

THE  JOURNAL,  Indianapolis,  Ind  ,  says  :  "  The  theory  of  muni- 
cipal socialism  assumes  that  all  public  officials  are  honest  and  efficient,  and 
where  this  is  the  case  it  works  out  well,  but,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  they 
usually  are  not.  The  city,  in  operating  large  public  concerns,  always  pays 
liberal  salaries  and  wages,  but  does  not  get,  as  a  rule,  as  efficient  service 
as  private  concerns.  There  is  a  continual  menace  from  political  influ- 
ence, where  there  is  a  large  patronage  to  distribute,  that  is  likely  at  any 
time  to  cripple  the  efficiency  of  the  service.  Again,  if  we  were  to  put 
in  an  electric  plant  what  assurance  have  we  that  the  next  board  would  not 
want  to  tear  it  out  and  put  in  a  better  one  ?  Electrical  inventions  be- 
come ancient  history  in  three  or  four  years  nowadays.  We  might  put  in 
an  expensive  plant  and  find,  by  the  time  that  we  had  it  paid  for,  that  we 
had  a  '  back  number'  on  our  hands." 

150 


THE  AMERICAN  COMMONWEALTH  says.  'Wiiiitever  lul- 
vantage  such  annexatiou  may  have  l>ri>u{]rbt,  it  so  increased  the  o|v 
poituuities  for  naisiuauafjemeut  ami  pluuder  that  it  has  enabled  Mr. 
Brj'ce  to  assert,  with  all  the  morecontidence:  'I'here  is  uo  deuyinj^  that 
the  ^overnmeut  of  cities  is  the  one  couspicuous  failure  of  the  United 
States.'  " 

THE  POLITICAL  SCIENCE  dUARTERLY  says  :     "Those  who 

advocate  state  uuina^enient  in  the  United  States,  forjret  to  think  of  the 
havoc  that  would  l)e  created  1>3'  the  simiile  political  inllueuce  of  our  law- 
makers. Were  the  state  to  run  the  railways  under  our  political  system, 
the  claims  upon  our  lejijislators  for  spoils  would  be  increased  a  thous- 
and fold." 

THE  BULLETIN,  Providence.  R.  I,,  says:  "To  add  the  manufac- 
ture of  jfas  and  the  generation  of  electricity  to  duties  already  beyond 
the  g:ra8p  of  our  city  officials  would  merelj'  call  more  attention  to  their 
incapacity.  The  present  test  of  employing;  men  who  vote  the  straijjht 
ticket  of  either  party  is  a  modest  one,  hardly  reciuirin^  the  iutellif:i:ence 
shown  by  a  school  fi:irl  in  selecting  a  new  gown,  yet  to  have  so  voted 
for  a  number  of  years  constitutes  a  claim  on  the  recognition  of  the  party 
which  is  considered  imperious.  Perhaps  it  is  an  instinctive  conception 
of  its  own  limitations  that  has  hitherto  encouraged  the  conservatism  of 
all  Rhode  Island  communities.  The  camel  has  a  long  journey  before  it, 
and  it  is  wise  to  adjust  the  load  to  the  back  which  has  to  bear  it;  if  onr 
neighbors  are  experimenting  with  their  caravans,  why  not  rest  awhile  in 
order  that  we  may  take  advantage  of  their  blunders?  Those  also  serve 
who  only  stand  and  wait." 

THE  CINCINNATI  COMMERCIAL  GAZETTE  says  :  "Whether 

the  chimerical  idea  that  it  is  the  province  of  government  to  do  every- 
thing for  everj'body  has  been  i^romoted  V)y  a  superstitious  vision  of  an 
impossible  political  and  social  condition  of  the  world  11  3'ears  from  now, 
or  whether  this  idea  has  received  an  impetus  from  some  other  quarter, 
there  certainly  seems  to  be  a  more  pronounced  effort  than  ever  before 
to  impose  additional  duties  upon  the  government,  notwithstanding  the 
fact  that  all  experience  proves  that  government  interference  with  private 
enterprise  is  prejudicial  to  the  interests  of  the  public.  The  proposition 
appears  absurd  when  carried  out  to  the  legitimate  result." 

THE  ELECTRICAL  DOINGS  says:  "We  are  all  familiar  with 
the  devious  ways  of  municipal  corporation  financiers  by  which  interest 
or  original  outlay  is  charged  to  one  account,  superintendence  to  another, 
and  cost  of  operation  to  another.  Nothing  is  harder  than  to  disentangle 
the  various  items  of  a  city's  expenses  and  to  group  them  under  head- 
ings which  will  give  a  fair  comparison  with  the  work  done  by  private 
corporations  in  the  same  Held.  Besides,  none  of  these  cities  has  been 
long  enough  in  the  business  of  electric  lighting  to  be  able  accurately 
to  ebtimate  the  cost  of  renewals  and  repairs." 

151 


THE  CHICAGO  TRIBUNE  says:  "  So  far  as  things  have  gone 
on  the  city  has  jiciid  t^^'O  prices  for  its  electric  lights.  The  work  of 
extension  has  been  far  from  satisfactory.  The  aim  and  intent  are  to 
make  the  city  government  a  paternal  one,  providing  light,  heat,  power, 
transportation,  electric  and  telephonic  communication,  etc.,  thereby 
constituting  a  vast  machine  with  powers  far  greater  than  ever  wielded 
by  Tammany,  and  giving  opportunity  for  corruption  on  the  biggest  con- 
ceivable scale." 

THE  CHICAGO  EVENING  JOURNAL  says:  "But  where  is 
the  thing  to  end  when  once  begun  ?  What  reason  is  there  why  the  city 
should  not  go  into  the  business  of  lighting  streets,  dwellings  and  public 
buildings,  and  also  into  the  heating  of  these  structures  ?  Why  should 
not  the  city  furnish  transportation  over  its  territory  as  well  as  light  ? 
The  reason  why  none  of  these  things  should  be  done  by  the  city  is  that 
they  can  be  as  well  if  not  better  done  by  individuals  or  by  corporations. 

"  So  long  as  municipal  government  cannot  keep  the  streets  in  proper 
condition,  it  is  not  worth  while  for  them  to  extend  the  field  of  their  in- 
efficient work." 

THE  CHICAGO  TRIBUNE  says:  "According  to  expert  testi- 
mony, backed  with  reliable  statistics,  Chicago's  municipal  electric  light 
plants  cost  the  people  more  a  lightthan  those  of  any  city  in  the  country." 

THE  HERALD  TIMES  of  Chicago,  says:  "Those  who  advocate 
municipal  ownership  of  street  railways,  gas  plants  and  properties  of  that 
kind,  assume  that  municipal  management  will  be  honest  and  capable, 
and  that  the  business  will  be  carried  on  for  the  advantage  of  the  public. 
Thej'^  start  out  with  the  hypothesis  that  if  these  properties  are  intrusted 
'to  the  municipality,  bj"  some  peculiar  dispensation  of  politics  the 
boodlers  will  disappear  and  upright  men  take  charge  of  all  the  large  and 
vastly  increased  interests  of  the  city.  One  argument  we  sometimes 
hear  is  that  if  the  city  owned  these  franchises  there  would  be  no  temp- 
tation to  boodlers  to  break  into  the  city  council,  as  there  would  be 
nothing  for  them  to  make  money  out  of,  and  their  occupation  would  be 
gone. 

' '  Now,  then,  say  the  advocates  of  municipal  ownership,  let  the  city 
build  and  own  its  own  street  railways,  its  own  gas  plants,  its  own  ele- 
vated roads,  and  the  city  council  will  most  surely  manage  them  hon- 
estly. We  would  like  to  know  why.  Will  the  vastness  of  the  property 
so  stagger  the  Coughlins,  the  Powerses  and  the  Hinky  Dinks  that  their 
consciences  will  all  of  a  sudden  bloom  into  sensitiveness  ?  Or  will  it  only 
give  them  a  bigger  quarry  and  an  enlarged  field  for  their  peculiar 
enterprise  ? 

"If  there  was  municipal  ownership  in  Chicago  to-day,  and  the  city 
owned  every  gas  plant  and  every  street  railway  within  its  borders,  these 
men  and  their  associate  boodlers  could  dispose  of  them  and  defy  the  citi- 
zens, just  as  they  have  disposed  of  other  property  and  franchises  belong- 
ing to  the  city  and  laughed  to  scorn  the  protests  of  the  people." 

152 


NEW  WORLD  of  Chicago,  says:  "There  is  a  gretit  deal  of 
force  in  the  arf]jumeut  which  some  of  the  daily  papers  have  advanced 
against  the  municipal  ownership  of  street  railroads,  gas  plants,  etc..  in 
this  country.  If  i.s  arrjiud  that  if  the  cifi/  voimcUs  in  thin  and  other' 
ritirn  are  so  thoronr/hli/  corrupt  that  the//  cannot  be  trusted  to  deal 
honestly  ivith  jxrivate  corporations  in  regard  to  these  matters,  it  is 
hardli/  to  be  exjucted  that  the//  ivould  deal  honestli/  tcith  the  public,  if 
the//  had  the  management  of  such  enterprises  in  their  own  hands.  This 
really  goes  to  the  root  of  the  whole  matter.  So  long  as  the  voters  of  the 
city  see  fit  to« elect,  over  and  over  again,  aldermen  whom  thej'  know  to 
be  absolutely  corrupt,  and  for  sale  to  the  highest  ladder,  it  is  hard  to 
see  how  municipal  ownership,  or  any  other  kind  of  ownershii),  can  pre- 
vent these  men  from  doing  that  which  they  notoriously  go  to  the  council 
for  the  piirpose  of  doing." 

THE  EVENING  NEWS.  Toronto,  saj-s:  "It  lias  been  found  in 
Philadelphia  that  municipal  management  of  the  gas  works  is  a  failure. 
It  costs  at  least  25  per  cent  more  to  8ui)ply  gas  under  civic  management 
than  it  will  when  a  company  takes  hold  of  it,  in  addition  to  which  there 
have  been  innumerable  scandals  in  connection  with  the  service. 

"  The  opposition  of  the  News  to  municipal  ownership  and  manage- 
ment of  public  franchises  has  been,  all  along,  on  the  ground  that  city 
business  cannot  be  conducted  with  the  same  economy  as  that  of  a  private 
corporation,  and  in  the  operation  of  a  service  of  that  kind,  the  waste  con- 
sequent upon  loose  management  is  equal  to  a  handsome  profit  for  a 
company." 

THE  NEW  YORK  TRIBUNE  says:  "If  the  works  are  not  leased, 
the  management  will  probably  continue  to  be  as  corrupt  and  generally 
unsatisfactory  as  hitherto,  and  to  furnish  an  '  awful  example '  against 
municipal  ownership  of  such  establishments,  or  against  municipal  man- 
agement oi  them.  Yet,  everybodj'  knows  full  well  that  all  the  troul)le 
lies  in  the  fact  that  the  department  is  controlled,  not  b}-  business  princi- 
ples, but  by  politics,  and  not  merely  local  politics,  but  state  politics." 

THE  NEW  YORK  COMMERCIAL  ADVERTISER  says:  "No 
substitute  can  be  found  for  private  interest,  and  the  hope  of  profit  in 
stimulating  efficient  and  economical  service.  Public  ownership  would 
waste  many  times  the  profit  of  private  owners,  besides  lowering  the 
quality  of  service  and  condemning  valuable  property  to  decay  by  neg- 
lect. This  is  true  of  state  as  of  municipal  aflairs.  State  socialism  would 
inaugurate  a  reign  of  waste,  inellicieucy  and  corruption." 

THE  ROCHESTER,  N.  Y.,  POST-EXPRESS  says:  -'Not  a  city 
in  the  United  States  can  be  named  where  the  business  intrusted  to  it  is 
managed  with  anything  like  the  skill  and  economy  of  a  successful  i)rivate 
business.  It  may  be  said,  as  is,  in  fact,  often  said,  that  when  gas  works 
and  street  cars  are  in  the  hands  of  pi-ivate  capitalists,  the  public  is  merci- 
lessly robbed  to  enrich  them.  Even  if  the  charge  be  true,  is  it  robbed  to 
the  extent  that  it  is  under  political  management  ? 

153 


THE  ELECTRICAL  REVIEW  says :  "  If  these  scientific  enthu- 
siasts could  be  persuaded  to  band  themselves  together  and  carry  out  their 
revolutionary  ideas  on  some  Pacific  island,  they  would  not  only  receive 
'  convincing  proof  of  the  impracticability  of  their  political  notions,  but 
would  spare  the  United  States  much  annoyance.  It  has  been  repeatedly 
and  convincingly  demonstrated  that  private  competition  can  be  relied 
upon  to  do  better  and  cheaper  work  than  municipal  management.  One 
watches  with  a  careful  eye  every  step  of  the  management  of  its  concerns; 
the  other  is  invariably  accompanied,  in  the  long  run,  by  mismanagement 
and  jobbery.  What  is  everybody's  business  becomes  nobody's  business, 
and  the  poor  tax  payer  always  suffers.  There  is  enough  corruption,  for- 
sooth, in  political  affairs  in  the  present  scope  of  governmental  functions, 
without  taking  dangerous  chances  on  an  expansion  of  the  field  of  opera- 
tion. The  less  the  state  interferes  with  private  aftairs,  the  better  for  the 
public." 

THE  BOSTON  JOURNAL  says:  "  Whoever  has  given  close  atten- 
tion  to  the  processes  of  municipal  politics  and  administration,  must 
shrink  from  adding  to  the  opportunities  and  inducements  to  mismanage- 
ment and  personal  agrandizement  at  the  public  cost. 

''Under  municipal  control,  the  present  experienced  employes  of 
these  companies  would  be  displaced  in  favor  of  political  '  workers.'  The 
henchmen  of  the  ward  boss  are  comparatively  harmless,  digging  in  a 
trench,  but  it  isn't  pleasant  to  imagine  the  results  if  they  should  be 
intrusted  with  the  responsibility  of  running  a  big  gas  plant,  or  let  loose 
among  a  lot  of  wires  surcharged  with  electricity.  There  certainly  would 
be  no  gain  in  point  of  safety  if  the  powerful  agencies  employed  in  the 
lighting  of  our  cities  should  be  turned  over  to  the  tender  mercies  of  the 
small  politicians,  and  experience  in  most  other  municipal  departments 
suggests  there  would  be  no  real  gain  in  cheapness." 

• 

THE  COURIER,  San  Bernardo,  Cal.,  says:  "The  city,  in  our 
opinion,  cannot  and  will  not  run  electric  lighting  as  economically  as 
would  a  corporation  of  business  men.  Every  city  in  the  Union  that  has 
experimented  with  furnishing  its  own  electric  lighting  has  made  a  flat 
failure  of  it  from  an  economical  standpoint.  A  municipality  cannot, 
and,  in  fact,  to  corroborate  our  assertion,  never  is,  as  careful  or  econom- 
ical as  a  private  business  association.  Politics  will  interfere.  The  man- 
agement, the  officials,  the  employes  of  the  city's  electric  lighting  works 
would,  as  a  rule,  be  working  petty  politicians.  They  would  rarely  be 
faithful.  Ward  workers  are  never  faithful,  except  to  their  bosses,  who 
can  give  them  a  grab  at  the  spoils.  Let  the  city  buy  a  plant  and  furnish 
its  own  electric  lighting,  and  it  will  be  a  heavy  loser  financially.  One 
party  or  another,  one  interest  or  another  successful  at  the  polls,  one  set 
of  trustees  or  another,  will  make  change  after  change  at  the  heavy 
expense  of  the  tax  payers." 


154 


THE  DISPATCH,  Columbus,  Ohio,  saj'B:  "  It  would  not  be  good 
policy,  in  the  jiulfjiiieut  of  anj'  well-informed,  prnctical  busineBS  man, 
for  the  city  to  erect  an  electric  light  pUmt.  The  best  statiatics  and  opin- 
ions we  have  on  the  subject,  show  that  the  management  of  such  things 
costs  more  under  the  auspices  of  a  citj*  government  than  by  a  j)rivate 
corporation,  yet  we  have  full  faith  in  them  because  of  the  well-estaMished 
fact  that  the  cost  of  managing  work  under  mumcii)al  corporations  is 
almost  invariably  greater  than  it  is  under  the  supervision  of  private  cor- 
porations. This  is  largely  due  to  the  fact  that  in  municipal  corporations 
men  are  appointed  on  account  of  political,  rather  than  strictly  business 
consideration." 

THE  HARTFORD  TIMES  says :  "The  work  would  be  no  better 
done  than  it  is  now,  and  i)robtibly  not  so  well  done  as  it  is  and  will  be 
by  private  enterprise.  We  might  as  well  say  that  the  government  should 
take  possession  of  all  the  horse-shoeing  work  in  the  country,  cut  down 
the  prices,  and  put  enough  men  to  work  to  shoe  horses  rapidly,  so  that 
no  one  would  be  required  to  wait  when  the  ice  comes,  and  the  horses 
need  caulking  ;  and  then  take  possession  of  the  boot  and  shoe  and  tailor- 
ing business,  and  run  the  factories.  It  would  be  one  short  step  from 
one  thing  to  another." 

THE  EVENING  POST  of  San  Francisco,  says :  "Nothing  is 
more  certain  than  that  up  to  the  present  time,  municipal  government 
all  over  the  United  States  is  a  failure.  In  cities  it  is  one  unending  fail- 
ure from  Maine  to  California.  There  is  not  a  large  town  in  the  country 
that  is  not  infested  with  bosses. 

Theorists  disagree  as  to  the  cause  of  municipal  misgovernment,  but 
there  is  no  doubt  that  a  large  part  of  the  misgovernment  is  due  to  the 
spoils  system." 

THE  CINCINNATI  TIMES  STAR  says:  "We  have  had  a  taste 
of  government  ownership  right  here  in  Cincinnati  for  several  weeks, 
and  the  flavor  has  not  yet  gone  from  our  mouths.  Our  water  works  have 
been  run  by  an  arm  of  the  government,  and  have  had  so.  much  politics 
mixed  in  them  that  screws  have  twisted  themselves  from  bolts,  and  steel 
eastings  have  warped  until  the  horrors  of  a  water  famine,  for  several 
days,  stared  the  people  of  this  city  in  the  face." 

THE  GAS  LIGHT  JOURNAL  says:  "Their  short-sighted  mean- 
ness to  their  salaried  ollicers,  intliieiice  of  ward  politicians  and  news- 
papers to  cut  down  salaries  to  the  standard  of  weekly  wage-earners,  its 
tendency  to  keep  educated  and  skilled  men  out  of  the  profession,  has 
resulted  in  bad  management  and  great  ultimate  loss. 

"Headstrong,  i^erverse  committee  men  think  they  know  every- 
thing, and  can  di8i)euse  with  ijrofessional  advice  to  a  greater  extent  than 
the  directors  of  a  gas  company  ever  pretended  to  do.  They  have  a  habit 
of  going  on  tours  of  inspection  of  gas  works  in  distant  towns,  often  with- 

155 


out  their  engineer,  without  having  any  knowledge  of  the  subject,  and  of 
misunderstanding  and  misrepresenting  what  is  shown  or  told  them  con- 
fidentially, etc." 

THE  NASHVILLE  AMERICAN  says:  "According  to  this  idea 
the  government  has  a  perfect  right  to  make  soap  or  to  manufacture 
readj'-made  clothing  or  peanut  candy,  if  they  can  do  it  cheaper  than 
private  individuals,  and,  indeed,  there  is  no  stopping-place  when  once 
the  rule  is  applied.  Of  course,  such  an  idea  as  this  could  not  for  an 
instant  be  entertained  by  any  one  but  the  most  pronounced  advocate  of 
centralization,  and  centralization  in  its  worst  form." 

THE  NEW  YORK  TRIBUNE  says  :  "  A  municipal  department  i^ 
controlled,  not  by  business  principles,  but  by  politics,  a  synonym  of 
rascality." 

THE  PORT  HURON  TRIBUNE  says  :  "  A  little  local  competi- 
tion would  be  better  than  for  the  citj'  to  go  into  the  electric  lighting 
business,  which  might  develop  several  soft  places  for  experimental 
favorites,  for  which  the  dear  city  would  have  to  foot  the  bills  and  the 
tax  payer  could  stand  back  and  take  it  out  in  growling." 

THE  NEW  YORK  TIMES  says :  ' '  The  past  week  has  brought 
revelations  of  the  most  barefaced  frauds  in  the  water  works  department 
of  the  city.  A  conservative  estimate  gives  $500,000  as  the  sum  of  which 
Chicago  has  been  robbed  during  the  last  two  years.  But  in  addition  to 
direct  stealing,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  through  lax  methods  of 
administering  the  department,  the  city  loses  more  than  $1,000,000  each 
year,  and  that  is  a  low  estimate.  Onl3'  very  unsophisticated  citizens  can 
be  surprised  at  any  degree  of  corruption,  no  matter  how  great  its  mag- 
nitude, for  the  rottenness  of  the  department  has  long  been  notorious. 
The  details  of  the  present  investigation  make  manifest  the  most 
iTuabashed  fraud,  and  effrontery  in  the  pursuance  of  criminal  methods 
that  indicates  long  familiarity,  coupled  with  the  utmost  confidence  of 
escaping  punishment.  The  truth  seems  to  be  that  each  successive  crop 
of  thieves  rested  secure  in  the  certainty  of  being  followed  in  office  by 
fellows  of  their  own  stripe,  who  would  find  their  profit  in  imitating 
scoundrelism  instead  of  exposing  it.  Under  such  circumstances  no 
extreme  caution  was  necessary,  and  events  justified  their  sense  of  secu- 
rity for  many  years,  until  now,  for  the  first  time  in  a  long  period,  a  man 
possessed  both  of  honesty  and  business  abilitj^  has  been  placed  at  the 
head  of  the  department." 

THE  PHILADELPHIA  LEDGER  says:  "The  city  has  hereto- 
fore suffered,  not  only  from  bad  gas  and  profligate  management,  but  from 
the  machinations  of  a  political  clique,  deriving  a  large  part  of  its  power 
in  municipal  politics  from  the  patronage  of  the  gas  works.  Bad  govern- 
ment in  all  departments  has  thus  resulted  from  city  management  of  the 
gas  works. 

156 


"  To  get  rid  of  this  venal  ami  corrupt  political  machine  wouhl  l)e  to 
take  a  lonp:  step  toward  «;oo(l  municipal  provernment,  as  it  would  he  to 
destroj'  the  strongest  and  most  dauj^eruus  of  all  the  political  jt)l»lier8' 
strongholds." 

THE  WASHINGTON  STAR  says:  "Not  only  do  the  employes 
of  a  government  of  a  city,  state  or  nation — do  less  work,  as  a  rule,  than 
persons  in  corporation  or  private  employment,  but  there  is  a  large  addi- 
tional expenditure  for  superintendence  and  clerical  work.  Foremen  and 
assistant  foremen  are  appointed  merely  to  furnish  good  places  for 
friends.  Chief  clerks,  assistant  chiefs  and  timekeepers  in  large  num- 
bers are  provided  with  salaries.  It  often  happens  that  the  pay  roll  calls 
for  more  money  for  these  positions  than  for  all  the  real  workers.  There 
are  few  governments  in  the  United  States,  from  that  of  the  nation  down 
through  the  states  to  the  small  cities,  that  do  not  i)ile  up  expenses  in 
this  way.  It  is  true  that  many  excellent  citizens  are  helped  along 
through  life  by  this  generous  management  of  public  aflfairs,  but  that  fact 
is,  nevertheless,  a  strong  argument  against  municipal  ownership  of  pub- 
lic works." 

THE  NEW  YORK  EVENING  POST  says:  "The  confessed 
break-down  of  the  municipal  gas  sj-stem  in  Philadelphia  is  a  severe  blow 
to  the  advocates  of  municipal  ownership.  A  legislative  investigation  has 
finally  laid  the  entire  system  so  bare  and  defenseless  that  the  business 
sentiment  of  the  citj"^  is  now  strong  for  turning  the  whole  thing  over 
to  private  companies.  It  is  amusing  to  read  that  the  only  argument 
made  against  this  course  was  that  of  "calling  attention  to  the  rate  at 
which  gas  is. furnished  by  municipalities  in  England.'  The  argument 
really  is,  a  capable  and  honest  government  can  run  citj*  gas  works  ; 
therefore  an  incompetent  and  corrupt  government  can  do  it." 

THE  NEW  YORK  SUN  says  :  "  Th^arguments  against  municipal 
or  county  ownership  have  been  stated  time  and  time  and  again,  and  it  is 
only  necessary  to  read  some  of  the  annual  reports  issued  by  various 
communities  owning  and  operating  electric  lighting  plants  to  fully  con- 
vince one  of  the  folly  of  such  an  umlertaking  with  our  present  system  of 
local  government.  Enterprises  or  industries  such  as  telephone  or  tele- 
graph systems,  electric  lighting  plants  and  street  railway.s,  flourish  best 
under  purely  ec(momical  conditions  that  are  unvariably  absent  from 
municipal  or  government  management." 

EVENING  JOURNAL,  Jersey  City,  says:  '  Gas  and  electricity 
cannot  l)e  made  absolute  monopolies  because  of  the  possibility  of  substi- 
tution. An  individual  may  use  oil  or  generate  his  own  gas  or  electricity, 
but  wells  can  be  closed,  telephones  prohibited  ani|  street  cars  limited  by 
ordinance. 

''The  ([uestion  that  is  being  agitated  by  socialists,  i)o|)uli8ts.  deiua- 
gogueb  and  others  is,  should  the  cities  own  the  plants  which  produce 

157 


these  necessities  or  conveniences,  or  should  it  grant  franchises  to  indi- 
viduals to  supply  them  ? 

"The  water  supv)ly  of  Jersey  City,  under  political  management, 
instead  of  showing  an  annual  profit,  as  it  would  under  private  manage- 
ment, shows  an  annual  deficit.  The  water  is  supplied  at  a  central  point 
by  a  private  company.  The  distribution  is  through  public  mains,  yet 
the  administration  of  the  water  department  costs  more  than  the  water. 
Similar  results  would  be  shown  by  each  of  the  common  services  required 
by  a  city  under  existing  conditions." 

TRIBUN'E,  Chicago,  saA'S :  "Mr.  Sullivan  argues  that  municipal 
administration  in  American  cities  is  so  extravagant  and  unbusiness-like 
that  the  powers  and  duties  of  the  municipalities  should  be  reduced 
rather  than  increased.  It  is  difficult  to  answer  this  objection,  which  is 
the  strongest  that  can  be  advanced.  Imagine  the  street  railways  of 
Chicago  in  the  hands  of  Bobby  Burke  or  Billy  Lorimer." 

THE  PHILADELPHIA  EVENING  ITEM  says:  "But  every  one 
knows  that  so  long  as  the  gas  works  are  under  municipal  control,  poli- 
tics, and  not  business  methods,  will  mark  the  management." 

THE  NEW  YORK  COMMERCIAL  ADVERTISER  says:  "  For 
many  years  the  city  of  Philadelphia  has  presented  a  valuable  object  les- 
son in  municipal  ownership  of  franchises.  It  has  conducted  the  city  gas 
works  by  the  usual  methods  that  prevail  in  American  cities.  That  is  to 
say,  the  works  have  been  part  of  the  city  political  machine.  Under  our 
system  they  could  not  be  anything  else.  There  has  been  the  usual 
result  of  extravagance  and  inefficiency.  Gas  has  been  high  and  poor, 
management  has  been  costly,  and  the  plant  has  deteriorated  by  neglect." 

THE  DAILY  EAGLE,  Brooklyn,  says  :  "The  demand  that  the 
gas  plant  be  turned  over  to  the  United  Gas  Improvement  Company,  to 
which  the  common  council  h%p  just  yielded,  came  from  many  of  the  best 
people  in  the  city.  Mass  meetings  were  held,  and  prominent  men  made 
speeches  declaring  that  the  city  had  been  unable  to  manage  its  plant 
successfully,  and  that  the  gas  supply  was  poor  and  that  the  business  was 
conducted  at  a  financial  loss.  The  plan  has  appealed  to  the  common 
sense  of  the  people.  The  opposition  has  come  from  two  sources  :  The 
politicians,  who  have  used  the  patronage  of  the  gas  works,  did  not  want 
to  give  them  up,  and  academic  theorists,  who  believe  that  the  citj-  should 
own  its  lighting  plants  and  its  transportation  plants,  did  not  want  Phila- 
delphia to  confess  that  the  experiment  of  public  ownership  and  operation 
had  been  a  failure." 

THE  TIMES-STAR,  Cincinnati,  says:  "  There  is  a  mistaken  idea 
current  that  Philadelphia  found  its  management  of  a  gas  plant  profitable. 

"What  makes  this  deficit  still  more  embarrassing,  and  still  more 
forcible  as  an  argument  against  the  socialistic  idea  of  municipal  owner- 
ship, is  the  fact  that  no  account  is  taken  of  the  interest  on  the  invest- 

158 


ment,  neither  is  an  acconut  of  the  deterioration  of  the  plant  taken,  two 
important  factors  which  everj'  careful  manager  of  a  corporation  figures 
ou  at  the  beginning  of  his  calculations." 

THE  LEADER,  Cleveland,  aays :  "A  glaring  failure  of  munici- 
pal ownership.  For  many  years  Phihulelphia  has  tried  municipal 
ownership  and  operation  of  her  gas  works,  and  now  she  is  sick  of  it 
and  wants  to  quit.     That  is  not  to  be  wondered  at. 

"  Not  only  has  Philadelphia  failed  to  make  a  profit  on  the  manufac- 
ture and  sale  of  gas,  but  the  works  have  actually  been  operated  at  a  loss, 
while  the  ([uality  of  gas,  which  costs  tweutj'  cents  a  thousand  more  than 
in  Cleveland,  is  constantly  deteriorating." 

THE  TIMES,  Richmond,  Va.,  says  ;  "  In  the  first  place  it  is  gen- 
erally urged  that  the  city  can  supply  the  people  of  Richmond  with  light 
at  cheaper  rates  than  private  companies  or  individuals  are  able  to  do. 
This  statement  is  not  ])orne  out  by  the  experience  which  our  people  have 
had  with  the  gas  works.  Independently  of  the  comparison,  which  is 
very  naturally  instituted  in  the  popular  minds,  between  the  rates  at 
which  illlumination  by  gas  and  electricity,  respectively,  can  be 
supplied,  the  comparison  being  very  strongly  in  favor  of  electricity, 
there  has  been  a  growing  feeling  of  dissatisfaction  with  the  price  at 
which  gas  has  been  furnished.  Even  if  there  had  been  no  competition 
between  gas  and  electricity,  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  people  of  this 
city  would  have  been  long  content  to  bear  the  burden  of  the  present 
city  charges  for  gas. 

"Such  has  been  the  principal  upshot  of  municipal  control  over  this 
question  of  light.  It  has  been  monopoly-  which  has  led  to  general  dis- 
content. 

"  We  have  ou  previous  occasions  mentioned  the  general  ground  of 
objection  to  the  establishment  by  the  city,  of  an  electric  plant  of  its 
own  ;  namely,  the  interference  with  the  competitive  rights  of  private 
companies  and  individuals,  the  enlargement  of  the  circle  of  unneces- 
sary ofhceholders,  the  diversion  of  a  large  amount  of  public  money, 
which  can  be  expended  to  more  advantage  in  other  public  improve- 
ments, and  the  imposition  upon  the  people  of  an  additional  form  of 
l)aternal  government." 

THE  ADVERTISER,  Portland,  Me.,  say.s  :  "The  reasons  are 
the  old  ones  of  incompetency  and  dishonesty.  The  works  have  fallen 
into  the  hands  of  the  politicians  and  the  oflicial  si)oil8  and  the  contracts 
for  materials  and  services  have  been  used  ior  the  i>nrpose8  of  the  ward 
leaders  and  petty  politicians  until  the  conditions  have  become  scandalous 
and  intolerable.  Nothing  better  i^erhaps,  could  be  expected  (»f  a  city  so 
ridden  by  venal  politicians  and  so  corrupt  politically  as  Philadelphia, 
but  in  New  York  or  Chicago  it  would  be  the  same.  I'ntil  the  moral 
level  is  lifted  in  the  large  cities,  municipal  ownership  is  inadvisable." 

159 


THE  DEMOCRAT,  Holyoke,  Mass.,  says:  "Philadelphia's 
municipal  ^as  plant  is  a  rank  failure  and  the  mayor  is  trying  to  sell  it  to 
private  parties.  He  says  that  the  plant  cannot  be  maintained  except  by 
increasing  the  tax  rate,  while  repairs  and  necessary  improvements  will 
cost  $5,000,000  in  the  next  three  years." 

THE  VOLKSBLATT,  Cincinnati,  says  :  "Municipal  ownership  of 
electric  plants.  If  we  recur  to  this  subject,  it  is  done  with  a  view  to 
save  the  city  from  impending  danger  as  far  as  it  is  in  our  power  to  avert 
it.  The  danger  is  great,  because  municipal  ownership  has,  at  first  view, 
much  to  commend  it  to  the  unitiated. 

' '  But  if  the  saying  of  the  old  Roman,  '  If  two  do  the  same  thing,  it 
is  not  the  same  thing,'  is  everywhere  applicable,  it  is  of  particular  force 
in  this  instance.  Private  service  and  public  service  are  as  different  from 
each  other  as  day  and  night,  and  it  should  not  be  difficult  to  grasp  the 
distinction.  A  private  corporation  is  compelled  to  husband  its  resources 
or  it  will  prove  a  failure.  It  will  therefore  not  invest  more  capital  or 
employ  more  people  than  is  absolutely  necessary,  and  will  get  full  value 
for  each  dollar  it  pays  out  in  wages. 

"It  is  quite  different  with  a  public  corporation.  The  citizens 
furnish  capital  in  the  shape  of  taxes,  and  if  this  money  is  wasted  they 
are  simply  bled  for  more  money.  In  place  of  an  expert,  the  manage- 
ment is  confided  to  a  politician,  whose  ignorance  alone  entails  serious 
loss  and  damage.  His  employers  are  of  the  same  stripe,  gutter  politi- 
cians, ignorant  and  careless,  as  they  are  appointed  more  with  a  view  to 
their  political  influence  than  their  ability  ;  and  to  crown  the  misery  we 
have  a  change  of  the  personnel  every  few  years.  If  these  incompetent 
people  have  really  acquired  some  skill  and  learning,  a  political  revolu- 
tion sets  in,  the  dorminant  power  party  is  hurled  from  power  and  a  new 
party  is  enthroned.  Its  very  first  effort  is  to  dismiss  all  employes  and  to 
make  room  for  the  healers  of  its  own  party.  Every  reader  will  at  once 
recognize  that  we  merely  state  facts  which  have  been  experienced  in 
our  city." 

THE  ELECTRICAL  WORLD  AND  ENGINEER  says  :  "Munic- 
ipal ownership  in  Kansas  has  been  quite  a  craze,  but  it  is  the  bond- 
holders now  wh,o  are  doing  the  crazing,  on  account  of  their  inability  to 
get  back  the  money  invested.  A  special  dispatch  from  Kansas  City  of 
March  29,  says  :  '  The  citizens  and  councilmen  of  Attica,  Kan.,  met  last 
night  and  discussed  the  question  whether  it  woiald  be  better  to  arbitrate 
with  the  bondholders  or  to  move  the  town.  The  town  is,  and  has  been 
for  several  years,  carrying  an  indebtedness  of  about  $33,000,  including 
old  sugar-mill  bonds  and  interest.  It  was  decided  that  if  the  matter  can 
not  be  adjusted  for  the  amount  the  town  is  able  to  pay,  the  citizens  will 
move  their  business  houses  and  residences  to  a  piece  of  ground  about  a 
quarter  of  a  mile  south  of  where  they  now  stand.  The  leading  business 
men  are  in  favor  of  moving.'  The  scheme  of  moving  a  town  to  escape 
indebtedness  is  not  original,  Ness  City,  the  county  seat  of  Ness  County, 

160 


having  practically  decided  on  that  method  of  unloading  her  burden  of 
debt  last  week.  A  contractor  hasollered  to  move  every  building  in  Ness 
City  to  a  new  site  nearly  u  mile  away  for  half  of  the  city's  indebtedness. 
Half  a  dozen  other  Kansas  towns  are  now  debating  whether  it  will  not 
be  cheaper  to  move  than  to  pay  bonds." 

COMMERCIAL  TRIBUNE,  Cincinnati,  Ohio,  says:  "'Do  you 
know  why  the  board  of  city  affairs,  when  it  came  into  office,  adopted  the 
contract  system  for  laying  water  mains  ?'  asked  a  city  official  yesterday. 
And  then,  without  waiting  for  an  answer,  he  proceeded  :  '  I  can  give 
the  reason  in  a  few  words.  It  was  because  of  the  iiadded  pay  rolls  which 
were  prevalent  under  the  system  of  laying  water  mains  by  day  labor 
under  the  board  of  iwlmiuistration.  The  padding  was  particularly  notice- 
able alwaj'S  before  an  election.  For  example,  in  iMarch  of  that  3'ear  the 
pay  roll  for  the  first  week  showed  only  19  men  employed,  the  second 
week  showed  54,  the  third  showed  (58,  and  last  week  the  roll  had  crept 
up  to  99,  and,  when  the  first  pay  roll  of  April  was  brought  before  the 
board  of  administration  for  approval,  the  number  on  the  roll  was  loT. 
The  election  was  on  Ai)ril  <!,  and  the  succeeding  weeks  of  the  mouth 
found  the  roll  dwindled  to  is,  and  no  more.  It  was  to  do  away  with  the 
padding  of  water-works  pay  rolls  that  the  board  of  city  affairs  estab- 
lished  the  system  of  laying  water  mains  bj'  contract.  Under  that  83's- 
tem  the  citizens  were  given  water,  and  the  cost  to  the  public  was  much 
less  than  one-half.  It  is  no  wonder  that  Mr.  Mullen,  of  the  board  of 
legislation,  wants  to  see  the  old  system  of  laying  water  mains  by  day 
labor  reintroduced.  The  padding  of  pay  rolls  is  a  valuable  thing  to  have 
arcniud  the  house  in  an  emergency,  such  as  the  coming  election  will 
prove  to  that  side  of  the  house.'  " 

CITY  GOVERNMENT  says:  "The  proposition  to  establish  a 
municipal  gas  plant  in  Buffalo  has  been  defeated  in  the  council.  While 
Cltji  Government  takes  neutral  grounds  in  the  discussion  of  the  question 
of  municipal  ownership,  yet  in  this  particular  instance  it  considers  the 
action  of  the  council  wise,  and  justitied  bj-  local  conditions. 

"  We  argue  from  different  premises,  but  we  reach  the  same  conclu- 
sion as  does  the  council.  Our  conviction  is  that  no  city  now  conducting 
a  public  plant  in  an  unbusiness-like  manner  should  undertake  any  other 
responsibility  for  fear  of  making  a  bad  matter  worse.  At  the  present 
writing,  Buffalo  is  the  most  wasteful  city  in  the  United  States,  if  not  in 
the  world,  in  the  use  of  water,  having  used  in  1899  more  than  250  gallons 
per  capita  per  day.  This  does  not  mean  that  the  city  is  cleaner  than  anj- 
other,  but  rather,  less  business-like.  It  means  that  a  large  amount  of 
money  is  expended  to  perform  a  service  which  is  absolutely  useless." 

MUNICIPAL  OWXEKSHIP  A  STEPPING  STONE  FOR  OFFICE. 

PUBLIC  POLICY,  says:  "This  country  \\\\\  in  time  learn 
that  they  must  stand  as  a  unit  against  every  socialistic  device  to  evade 
laws  and   fasten  upon  communities   debts   for  internal   improvements 

l<3i 

(11) 


■which  taxpayers  must  pay.  Des  Moines,  Iowa,  and  Mayor  MacYicar 
have  become  famous  through  an  attempt  to  evade  the  law  and  saddle  a 
municipal  electric  lighting  plant  upon  the  tax  payers  of  that  city.  The 
proceedings  of  the  League  of  American  Municipalities  are  burdened 
with  long  descriptions  of  what  Des  Moines  had  or  was  going  to  do  in  the 
direction  of  municipal  ownership.  In  these  gatherings  of  congenial 
spirits,  Mayor  Mac  Vicar  has  posed  as  a  brilliant  corporation  fighter,  and 
as  such  has  received  much  applause.     He  is  a  veteran  of  two  campaigns. 

First,  The  water  works.— Mayor  Mac  Vicar  devoted  great  energy 
and  cost  the  citizens  of  Des  Moines  much  time  and  money  in  many  ways 
trying  to  compel  the  water  works  company  to  sell  to  the  city.  Years 
spent  in  investigation,  in  the  abuse  of  corporations  and  the  manufacture 
of  campaign  material  resulted  in  an  agreement  on  price  between  -the 
company  and  the  council.  The  matter  was  then  submitted  to  a  vote  of 
the  people  and  voted  down. 

"  Second.  The  electric  lighting  plant.— Mayor  MacVicar,  with  the 
aid  of  interested  parties  who  wanted  to  make  money  by  selling  an  electric 
lighting  plant  to  the  city,  took  up  the  study  of  electrical  central  station 
construction,  engineering  and  operation,  and  was  soon  able  to  give 
points  to  the  ablest  manufacturing,  construction,  engineering  and  cen- 
tral station  operators  in  the  country.  He  demonstrated  to  a  certainty 
that,  with  'a  lo.yal  council,  a  competent  (or  an  interested)  engineer  '  and 
a  Napoleonic  mayor,  there  is  no  need  to  learn  from  experience  or  to  be 
bound  by  laws  enacted  to  protect  tax  payers  from  being  raided  with 
experiments.  « 

''The  proudest  achievement  of  Maj^or  MacVicar 's  public  life  was 
the  making  of  a  contract  with  Messrs.  McCasky  &  Holcomb  Company, 
adroitly  drawn  to  evade  the  law.  By  the  terms  of  this  contract  the  city 
agreed  to  it  sue  warrants,  to  levy  a  tax  for  the  payment  of  the  same,  and 
pledged  its  future  revenue  for  the  payment  of  the  warrants.  It  was 
claimed  that  these  wari'ants  were  to  be  issued  for  only  the  amount  that 
the  city  had  heretofore  been  paying  for  lighting  and  were,  therefore,  in 
anticipation  of  expenses  necessarily  incurred,  and  came  under  the  pro- 
vision of  law  authorizing  the  anticipation  of  future  revenues  to  meet 
contracts  for  current  expenses,  and  should  not  be  debarred  on  account 
of  being  in  excess  of  the  debt  limit.     The  plant  was  to  cost  $105,000. 

"Mr.  J.  H.  Windsor,  representing  the  tax  paj'ers,  began  a  suit  to 
cancel  the  contract  as  illegal,  because  unauthorized  by  vote  of  the  peo- 
ple and  creating  a  debt  beyond  the  city's  constitutional  limit  of  indebt- 
edness. The  case  was  first  tried  before  Judge  Bishop,  who  sustained 
the  contention  of  the  tax  payers  and  was  brutally  assaulted  by  Mayor 
MacVicar  and  others  for  doing  it.  The  supreme  court  has  now  affirmed 
the  decision  of  Judge  Bishop  in  a  long  c  pinion,  written  by  Judge 
Deemer." 

OPINION   OF   THE    COURT. 

"The  court  does  not  think  that  a  contractual  obligation,  such  as 
made  for  the  ordinary  expense  of  a  city  (light,  water,  gas,  etc.),  exists 

162 


here  ;  the  rule  cauuot  applj-  to  ubligatiou  incurred  fur  erectiujj  a  plant 
to  furnish  tboee  needs  of  the  city. 

"  The  court  believes  that  the  rule  adhered  to  must  be  correct,  for, 
otherwise,  a  city,  by  such  contracts  as  the  one  in  question,  luij^ht  absorb 
all  its  general  revenues  and  leave  nothing  for  expenses  ;  warrants  would 
then  be  issued  to  cover  these  expenses,  and  which  could  be  enforced 
against  the  city,  thus  thwarting  the  very  purpose  of  the  constitutional 
inhibition  of  debt." 

This  decision  spoils  a  chapter  in  Prof.  Bemis'  latest  book— the 
would-be  secretary  and  statistician  of  the  League  of  American  Munici- 
palities -in  which  he  uses  this  contract  to  show  municipal  politicians 
how  the\'  can  evade  the  law  and  obtain  municipal  plants. 

Maj'or  ^lacVicar  can  now  join  the  partj*  ol  court  repuiliators.  He 
maj-  think  the  people  are  with  him.  but  the  tax  paj'ers  are  not.  Who 
are  the  people  ? 

THE  WESTERN  ELECTRICIAN  says  of  the  Mayor  of  Des 
Moines:  "  Their  position  would  be  much  stronger  were  their  leaders 
men  of  experience  and  established  reputation.  Mayor  MacVicar  of 
Des  Moines,  who  posed  as  the  special  champion  of  municipal  ownership 
throughout  the  meeting,  and  who  was  chosen  i)resident  of  the  organiza- 
tion, spoke  with  an  air  of  authority  upon  this  subject,  in  spite  of  the 
fact  that  there  is  no  municipal  plant  in  Des  Moines,  and  that  there  is  not 
likely  to  be  one  there  for  some  time.  Yet  Mayor  MacVicar  will  hence- 
forth be  quoted  as  an  authority  upon  this  subject  by  advocates  of 
municipal  ownership,  although  his  address  merely  repeated  the  claims 
of  those  who  were  interested  in  securing  the  establishment  of  a  city 
plant  in  hi§  bailiwick.  Under  the  circumstance^,  no  business  man  would 
be  guided  in  making  an  investment  or  determining  the  policy-  of  any 
enterprise  he  was  directing,  by  views  of  one  so  iuexi)erieuced. 

"Public  sentiment  is  frequently  misrepresented  by  office  holders, 
who  labor  under  the  impression  that  they  form  and  direct  public  opin- 
ion, whereas  they  are  merely'  the  creatures  of  circumstances.  Too  much 
importance  should  not  be  attached,  therefore,  to  the  expressions  of 
local  politicians,  whether  they  are  clothed  in  official  authority  or  merely 
asi)ire  to  place. 

'"  It  is  admitted  even  by  thote  who  favor  the  new  idea  that  many  of 
its  most  earnest  advocates  are  actuated  entirelj*  bj"  seltish  motives.  'I'hey 
may  be  influenced  by  the  desire  for  political  advantage  or  liuancial  gain. 
In  any  event  the  tax  payer's  interests  are  lost  sight  of,  when  such  rapa- 
cious spoilsmen  advocate  municipal  ownership.  Honest  men  hesitate 
about  joining  in  such  a  movement." 


163 


EDITORIAL    COMMENTS    REGARDING   THE 

AUTHOR. 

M.  J.  Francisoo  lias  been  known  for  years  as  a  pioneer  in  combating 
the  municipal  ownership  of  electric  light  and  railway  plants,  and  the 
facts  and  data  accumulated  in  the  study  of  his  specialty,  have  been  of 
great  value  to  all  interested  in  electric  lighting.  —  Electrical  Review. 

He  is  considered  an  expert  in  the  line  of  economic  investigation. — 
Rutland  Daily  Herald. 

He  holds  no  brief  for  any  theory  of  society  or  of  government,  but 
simply  submits  the  whole  question,  in  a  cold-blooded  way,  to  the  test  of 
bookkeeping  and  dollars  and  cents. —i\'ew  York  Evening  Post. 

He  treats  the  question  with  especial  reference  to  the  experiences  of 
electric  lighting,  by  various  towns  in  the  United  States.  —  The  Liberty 
Review,  Londou,  England. 

His  figures  will  be  found  difficult  to  disprove,  we  think. — Electrical 
World. 

He  has  exposed  the  fallacy  of  municipal  ownership,  and  his  writings 
have  made  him  an  acknowledged  authority  upon  this  subject. — Montreal 
Star. 

He  is  recognized  as  an  expert  in  municipal  ownership,  and  his  opin- 
ions are  sought  after. — Daily  News. 

His  work  is  a  masterly  showing  of  the  fallacy  of  municicipal  owner- 
ship.— S.  G.  Parsons,  Boston. 

I  consider  it  the  ablest  argument  ever  made  against  municipal  own- 
ership.— Marsden  J.  Perry,  Providence. 

He  is  author  of  the  able  and  forcible  book  entitled,  "Municipal 
Ownership  vs.  Private  Corporations." — Electricity  of  New  York. 

He  has  made  an  elaborate  investigation  of  municipal  ownership. — 
Ailing,  before  Connecticut  Legislature. 

In  his  book  can  be  found  many  things,  which  the  advocates  of 
municipal  control  will  find  difficult  to  prove  untrue. — Modern  Light 
and  Meat. 

His  speeches  are  more  widely  quoted,  than  those  of  any  man  on  his 
side  in  America. — Passaic  Daily  News. 

He  has  made  an  exhaustive  study  of  municipal  ownership. — Post 
Express,  Eochester. 

16J: 


He  has  presented  a  number  of  able  arguments  a2:aiu8t  municipal 
ownership. — Street  Rallwatj  Jounidl. 

He  presents  a  most  formidable  array  of  data,  as  well  a3  mauj-  records 
of  municipal  plant  failures. — Electrical  Engineer. 

He  is  the  only  man  I  know  of,  who  has  made  a  thorouj^h  study  of 
this  (luestion.  and  has  analyzed  the  results  intelligently,  basing  his  con- 
clusions upon  personal  examinations.— Burdett,  before  Massachusetts 
Legislature. 

He  has  not  onl}'  succeeded  in  collecting  a  mass  of  valuable  data,  but 
in  presenting  it  has  handled  his  facts  in  such  a  forcible  and  direct 
manner,  as  to  carry  conviction  with  them. — Electrical  Jnduitries. 

He  is  a  noted  electrician,  and  his  able  article  commends  itself  to  the 
readers  of  the  News. — Saginaw  Neius. 

He  has  recently  published  a  treatise  on  Municipal  Ownership  vs. 
Private  Corporations,  and  has  collected  with  great  care  the  statistics  of 
cities  owning  their  own  light  plants. — Times-Star,  Cincinnati. 

He  is  an  eminent  engineer,  and  has  taken  great  pains  to  investigate 
the  facts.  —  Times-Herald,  Chicago. 

His  figures  are  accepted  in  the  electrical  world  as  standard. — 
Journal,  Atlanta,  Ga. 

His  reviews  of  the  questions  of  municipal  ownership  cannot  be 
otherwise  than  interesting,  to  those  who  are  investigating  this  tpiestion. 
— Neius,  Savannah,  Ga. 

He  has  personally  examined  nearly  all  of  the  municipal  plants  in  the 
United  States,  and  is  well  qualified  to  write  upon  the  subject.— .4 //<cri- 
can  Eleetrieian. 

At  the  Cape  May  convention  he  read  his  first  paper  on  municipal 
ownership,  which  attracted  wide  spread  attention.  He  has  contributed 
to  many  scientific  journals,  on  this  and  kindred  subjects.  In  1893  he 
published  a  book  on  municipal  ownership,  which  secured  favorable 
mention  from  the  press  of  this  country  and  Europe.— A7^;c^/-ic  Power., 

M.  J.  Francisco,  a  man  of  wide  experience  in  electrical  aflairs,  spoke 
at  considerable  length  in  answer  to  the  statements  made  by  those  in 
opposition  to  the  proposed  ordinance,  giving  the  local  company  a  ten- 
year  contract.  He  spoke  from  the  standpoint  of  a  practical  man.  He 
took  in  succession  each  city  plant  which  had  been  presented  by  the 
other  side  as  an  example  of  cheap  light,  and  demonstrated  conclusively 
that  the  figures  given  Avere  a  mass  of  inaccuracies,  and  absolutely  value- 
less.— Argus,  Albany,  N.  Y. 


1G5 


INDEX. 

Arc  and  Incandescent  Lights  furnished  bj*  Private  and  Municipal 

Plants 29 

Address  before  League  of  American  Municipalities 3 

Average  Cost  in  Private  and  Public  Plants 43 

An  Insolvent  Utopia 136 

An  Economic  Truth 45 

All  Hope  of  Success  in  Detroit  Gone 83 

American  Commonwealth .* 151 

Advertiser,  Portland,  Me 159 

Allegheny  and  New  Haven  Compared 71 

Adams,  Prof. ,  on  City  Financering 7 

Argus,  Alameda,  on  Loss  by  Municipal  Ownership 12 

An  Advocate  of  the  Plan 57 

Austin's  Experience  with  a  Business  Enterprise 65 

Ashley's,  Prof.,  Experience  in  Toronto 128 

Bliss,  E.  W.,  Tax  payers  Take  the  Risk 132 

Boyd,  J.  G. ,  on  Increased  Taxes , 69 

Boston  Daily  Traveller 150 

Bulletin,  Providence,  R.I 151 

Business  by  Politicians 123 

Boston  Journal 154 

Basis  of  Municipal  Ownership 56 

Bryce,  Prof. ,  on  American  Cities 11 

Boston's  Experience  with  Municipal  Ownership 26 

Brophy's,  Capt.,  -Report 26 

Bakewell's,  Hon.  Thos.  V.,  Report 59 

Bay  City  Tribune  on  Local  Management 73 

Blirdett,  E.  W. ,  on  Wild  Statements 145 

Cost  when  True  Accounts  are  Rendered 44 

Comparative  Cost  of  Incandescents 46 

Cost  of  Incandescent  Lights 46 

Cleveland  Plain  Dealer 147 

Cooley,  Judge,  on  Municipal  Ownership 127 

Connor,  Hon.  Chas.  O 10 

Crawford,  Robert  of  Glasgow,  on  Municipal  Ownership  in  America  13 

Cook,  W.  W.,  on  Political  Free-booters 128 

City  Plants  Rebuilt..... 18 

Cahoon,  J.  B.,  Municipal  Ownership  from  a  Business  View 133 

Commercial  Tribune,  Cincinnati,  Ohio 161 

"Cincinnati  Commercial  Gazette 151 

Chicago  Tribune 152 

166 


Chicago  Evening  Jouriiftl lo3 

Courier,  San  Baruftdo 154 

Councilmeu  of  Logansport,  Ind. ,  Claim  There  is  a  Loss 97 

Cincinnati  Times  Star  155 

City  Government 69  101 

Correct  Comparison  of  Lights 43 

Cost  of  Lights  bv  Private  Companies 35 

Comparative  Cost  as  Shown  by  Massachusetts  Reports 40 

Cost  of  Lights  bj'  Municipal.  Plants 39 

Depreciation 10 

Doherty's,  H.  L.,  Experience 132 

Detroit  Evening  News 149 

Despatch,  Columbus,  Ohio 155 

Daily  Eagle,  Brooklyn 158 

Democrat,  Holyoke,  Mass 100 

Dillion,  Judge,  on  Perils  of  Corruption 3,  9 

Detroit's  Experience 81,  82 

Detroit  Free  Press  on  Municipal  Plant 79 

Detroit  Tribune  on  Their  White  Elephant 79 

Discussion  Before  City  Council  at  Logansport,  Ind 97 

Ex-Mayor  Matthews'  Report 33 

Exv)erieuce  of  Municipalities 47 

Ex-Gov.  Russell  ou  Municipal  Ownership  127 

Editorial  Opinions 147 

Editorial  Comments  in  Reference  to  the  Author 104 

Experts  on  Depreciation 18 

Electrical  Doings 151 

Evening  News.  Toronto 153 

Electrical  Review   154 

Evening  Post,  San  Francisco 1.55 

Evening  Journal,  Jersey  Citj' 157 

Electrical  World  and  Engineer ....  100 

Experience  is  the  Best  Teacher 10 

Easton  Express  on  the  Municipal  Plant 84 

Expert's  Report  on  Negaunee  Plant •  • 103 

Expert's  Report  on  Petoskey  Plant 110 

Expenses  Increase  at  Swantou,  Vt 117 

Fitler,  Ex-Mayor,  on  MiHiiiauagement Iq 

Facts  Disclosed  b}'  City  Oflicials 50 

Foote's,  Alen  R,,  Views  R"j;arding  Statements,  etc 135 

Few  Municipal  Plants  in  O|)position  to  Private  Companies 33 

Financering  Plans  of  Socialists 13 

Gray,  Prof.,  on  the  Theory 128 

Greenoush,  Mr.,  on  Examinations 130 

Germuuder,  M.  .\.,  on  !\[iiiiicipal  Management 134 

Gas  Light  Journal 155 

Grafton,  W.  Va.,  Report 86 

Hewitt,  Ex-Mayor,  on  Partisan  Interests 7 

Km 


I 

Hopkin's,  Pres. ,  Experience 128 

Hadley,  Dr.  A.  T. ,  on  Management  by  the  Few ...  130 

Herald-Times,  Chicago 152 

History  of  the  Petoskey  Plant 110 

Hartford  Times 155 

Higgins,  E.  E. ,  on  British  Tram  ways 145 

Harper's  Weekly  on  Ward  Leaders ...  8 

Holyoke's,  Mass.,  Experience 87 

History  of  Springfield,  111. ,  Plant 113 

Hornaday,  W.  D.,  on  iVustin's  Municipal  Ownership 66 

Interview  with  a  Citizen  of  Marietta,  O 101 

Interview  with  Citizens  of  Paducah,  Ky 109 

Iron,  Ore. ,  on  Negaunee's  Plant 106 

Journal,  Indianapolis,  Ind 150 

Jackson,  Wm. ,  oq  Depreciation 21 

Kibler,  E. ,  says,  Barrier  to  Good  Government 132 

Ivauffman's  Director,  Eeports 26 

Lynch,  William  A. ,  on  Municipal  Ownership 51 

Legal  Opinions 127 

Low,  Hon.  Seth,  on  Municipal  Ownership 128 

Loud,  Senator,  on  Public  Management 130 

Leader,  Cleveland,  O 159 

Loss  by  Municipal  Ownership 94 

Laughlin,  Prof.  J.  L.,  on  Quasi  Public  Institutions 144 

Municipal  Ownership  Prevents  Improvements 51 

Municipal  Ownership  Increases  Taxes 31 

Municipal  Plants  in  Small  Places 32 

Municipal  Plants  Sold  or  Abandoned 22 

Municipal  Ownership  a  Stepping  Stone  for  Office 161 

Municipal  Management 49 

Municipal  Ownership  in  Santa  Eosa,  Cal 59 

Milwaukee  Journal 149 

Municipal  Ownership  in  England  Not  Satisfactory 133 

Myers,  Prof.,  on  Chicago  Plant   146 

Municipal  Reports  as  to  Cost  do  Not  Agree 32 

Mills,  John  Stewart,  Tells  when  Trouble  Begins 11 

Matthews',  Ex-Mayor,  Eeport .^. 19,  33 

Mayor  of  Chicopee  on  Cost  of  Lights 58 

Mitchell,  John,  on  Spoils  System 128 

Municipal  Plant  Eecords 65 

Major,  Hon.  G.  G.,  of  Toledo,  on  the  Local  Plant 120 

Mayor  of  Eock  Falls,  111.,  on  Depreciation 17 

New  York  Times 148,  156 

iNorth  American  Eeview 11,  149 

Newark  Advertiser 149 

New  Bedford  Standard  on  Middleboro's  Experiment 102 

New  World,  Chicago 153 

Not  a  Fair  Comparison 14 

16S 


New  York  Tribune 153,  15G 

New  York  Commercial  Advertiser 153,  158 

Nashville  American 156 

New  York  Evening  Post 157 

New  York  Sun 157 

Official  Opinions 137 

Out  of  the  Frj-ing  Pan  into  the  Fire  . .    58 

Porter,  R.  J.,  on  Municipal  Ownership  in  England 131,  1H3 

Perkins',  John  H.,  Report 144 

Political  Science  Quarterl3' 151 

Port  Huron  Tribune 150 

Philadelphia  Ledger 15G 

Philadeli)hia  Evening  Item 158 

Public  Policy  on  Detroit  Business 82 

Purchase  of  Plants  by  Municipalities 59 

Peculiar  Statement  of  the  Maj'or  of  Marshalltown 99 

Question  of  Cost 54 

Quinc3',  Maj'or,  on  Depreciation 18 

Report  made  to  Citj-  of  Brookline 33 

Rosewater,  Prof. .  on  Municipal  Reports 128 

Rochester  Post-Express •  • 153 

Report  of  Committee  N.  Y.  Legislature 146 

Ruggles,  Ex-Pres.,  on  City  Management 48 

Report'  of  Special  Committee  of  Jamestown,  N.  Y 95 

Reports  of  Investigating  Committees 32 

Supren  e  Court  of  Massachusetts 130 

Sheperdson,  Prof. ,  on  ^Municipal  Ownership ...  140 

Supreme  Court  of  California 62,  63 

Santa  Rosa's  Experience 59 

Statement  of  Mayor  of  Lansing,  Mich 97 

Statements  of  Citizens  of  Crawfordsville,  Ind 74 

Sale  of  Apparatus 17 

Shaw's,  Dr.  Albert,  Testimony 146 

Statement  of  Councilman  at  Madison,  N.  J 98 

The  Interests  of  Labor •  •  55 

The  Basis  of  Municipal  Ownership 56 

Times,  Lowell,  Mass 150 

Tribune,  Chicago 158 

Times-Star,  Cincinnati 158 

Tax  payer  of  Jamestown 95 

Times,  Richmond,  Ya 159 

Table  of  Municipal  Plants 39 

The  Way  they  Evade  the  State  Law 114 

Testimony  of  Ex  President  of  Toledo.Council 117 

The  \Yreck  at  Austin.  Tex 65 

Volksblott,  Cincinnati 160 

Very  Few  Municipal  Plants 33 

"Wright,  Carroll  D.,  referring  to  Aldermen 129 

100 


Wilde,  -Justice,  Limitations  of  Cities  Powers 130 

Wisner,  E. ,  on  T  oledo's  Experience 121 

Weekly  Sentinel,  La  Mars,  la 150 

Washington  Star 157 

Western  Electrician 1 68 

Waring,  Hon.  Charles,  on  Political  Evils (> 

White,  Ajidrew  D. ,  on  Corruption  of  Cities !^ 

Walker's,  Chief,  Estimate 45 

Whitney,  Prof.,  on  Loss  of  Dignity 128 

What  do  Incandescent  Lights  Cost  ? 57 

Yerkes,  Mr.,  Says  is  a  Disgrace 14(> 


MUNICIPAL  PLANTS. 


Austin,  Texas 65 

i^tlantic  Highlands,  N.  J. . . .  69 

Atlantic,  Iowa TO 

Abingdon,  Va 70 

Ames,  Iowa TO 

Atkin,  Minn TO 

Athens,  Ala TO 

Anderson.  Ind TO 

Adrain,  Mich T 1 

Arlington,  Minn 71 

Allegheny,  Pa 71 

Aurora,  111 Tl 

Ashtabula,  Ohio Tl 

Alexandria,  Va Tl 

Alexandria,  Minn Tl 

Bellvue,  Iowa 72 

Bay  City,  Mich T2 

Bloomington,  111 72 

Bloomfield,  Iowa , 72 

Bethany,  Mo 72 

Belmont,  Mass T2 

Braintree,  Maes T3 

Batavia,  N.  Y 73 

Bangor,  Me 73 

Bowling  Green,  Ky 73 


Blue  Island,  111 73 

Carthage,  Ohio 75 

Clyde.  Ohio 73 

Columbus,  Ind 74 

Catawissa,  Pa 74 

Chariton,  Iowa 74 

Crawfordsville,  Ind 74,  126 

Chicago,  111 75 

( "onneaut,  Ohio 77 

Chambersburg,  Pa 77 

Columbia  City,  Ind 77 

Council  Grove,  Kan -  .  77 

Chicopee,  Mass 58,  77 

Decatur,  111 77 

Detroit.  Mich 78 

Danvers,  Mass 83 

Danville,  Va 83 

Dawson,  Ga.          84 

Dunkirk,  N.  Y 84 

Estherville,  Iowa 85 

Elberton,  Ga 84 

Elgin.  Ill 84 

Easton,  Pa 84 

Emons,  Pa 85 

Fremont,  Neb 85 


170 


Fayette,  Mo 85 

Fairfield,  Iowa 85 

Faltou,  Mo 85 

Fort  Worth,  Texas 85 

Fredonia,  N.  Y 85 

Frederick,  Md 8G 

Granville,  Ohio 8G 

Grafton,  W.  Ya 86 

Grandledge.  Mich 87 

Greenwich,  Ohio 87 

Galveston,  Texas 87 

Greenfield,  Ind 87 

Griffin,  Ga 87 

Goshen,  Ind    87 

Grand  Eapids,  Mich 58 

Holyoke,  Mass 87 

Henderson,  Minn 89 

Hingham,  Mass 89 

Hannibal,  Mo 89 

Hudson,  Mass 57,  90 

Hull,  Mass 90 

Hubbard,  Ohio 90 

Hamilton,  Ohio 90 

Henderson,  Ky 93 

Hamilton,  N.  Y 93 

Higginsville,  Mo 93 

Herington,  Kan 93 

Holland,  Mich 93 

Herkimer,  N.  Y 93 

Hight  Point,  N.  C 53 

Huntington,  Ind 93 

Indianola,  Iowa 93 

Jacksonville,  Fla 94 

Johnson,  Vt 94 

Jackson,  Ohio 94 

Jacksonville,  111  94 

Jamestown,  N.  Y* 94 

Kalamazoo,  Mich 90 

Kendallsville.  Ind 96 

Lowell,  Mich 96 

Lisbon,  Iowa 96 

Leon,  Iowa 96 

Logansport,  Ind 96 

Lewiston,  Me 97 

Lansing,  Mich 97 

Lyons,  Iowa 97 

Miamisburg,  Ohio 98 

Marseilles,  111 98 


Martinsville,  Ind 98 

Montpelier,  Ohio 98 

Mattoon,  111 98 

Madison,  N.  J 98 

Mishawaka,  Ind 99 

Muncie,  Ind 99 

Meadville,  Pa 99 

Marshalltown,  Iowa 99 

Macon,  Mo 100 

Marietta,  Ohio 100 

Martins  Ferry,  Ohio 101 

Marshall,  Mich 101 

Mt.  Pleasant,  Iowa  101 

Mazomanie,  Wis 101 

Marblehead,  Mass 101 

Middleboro,  Mass  101 

Madisonville,  Ohio 102 

Marion,  Ind  102 

Morgan  Park,  111 102 

Marquette,  Mich 102 

Morrisville,  Yt 102 

North  East,  Pa 103 

Negaiinee,  Mich 103 

Northfield,  Vt 107 

Newbury,  S.  C 107 

Needham,  Mass 108 

North  Attleboro,  Mass 108 

Ortonville,  Minn 108 

Ovid,  Mich 108 

Osage  City,  Kan 108 

Oxford,  Ohio 108 

Painsville,  Ohio 108 

Paducah,  Ky 109 

Paris,  111 109 

Paw  Paw,  Mich 109 

Plain  City,  Ohio  109 

Pawnee  City,  Neb ' 109 

Peabody,  Mass 109 

Petoskey,  Mich 110 

Portland,  Mich 108 

Quitman,  Ga Ill 

Quakertowu,  Pa Ill 

Rock  Falls.  Ill Ill 

Rochelle,  111 112 

Reading,  Mass 112 

Rensselaer,  Ind 112 

Rushville,  Ind 112 

St.  Charles,  111 112 


171 


St.  Clair,  Pa     112 

South  Boston,  Va 112 

Salem,  Va 112 

St.  Peter,  Minn 113 

Sherman,  Texas    ..    113 

Springville,  N.  Y 113 

Stuart,  Iowa 113 

Shelby,  Ohio  113 

Statesville,  N.  C 113 

Santa  Cruz,  Cal 113 

Springfield,  111 113 

Somerville,  Tenn 115 

St.  Charles,  Mo 115 

South  Norwalk,  Conn 115 

Stanton,  111   116 

Smyrna,  Del 116 

Shelby,  Mich IIG 

Shaftsbury,  Penn 116 

Shickshinny,   Pa 116 

Santa  Clara,  Cal 116 


St.  Joseph,  Mo 117 

Swanton,  Vt 117 

Salem,  111 117 

Toledo,  Ohio 117 

Taunton,  Mass 124 

Titusville,  Pa 124 

Topeka,  Kan 124 

Tarentum,  Pa 124 

Vinton,    la...... 125 

Wheeling,  W.  Va 125 

Westfield,  N.  Y 125 

Waseca,  Minn 125 

Wakefield,  Mass 125 

Wellston,  Ohio 125 

Wells  River,  Vt 125 

Wiuterset,  la 126 

Watervliet,  N.  Y 126 

Wilmington,  Ohio 126 

Wa))akoneta,  Ohio  126 

Ypsilanti,  Mich 126 


172 


4  II   i  'I.  il  ,1 


UMlUiJl'lU  V 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


JUN 


jtCO  LOURII 


SEC'tiicimt' 


^i   NOV  20 1975 
141975 


Form  L9-Series  4939 


3    1158   00734   3295 


HD 
F847m 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA    001  253  957    3 


